心理学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (5): 812-830.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.00812
收稿日期:
2021-06-01
发布日期:
2023-02-14
出版日期:
2023-05-25
通讯作者:
范雪灵, E-mail: fanxueling@nju.edu.cn
基金资助:
JIANG Xuting, WU Xiaoyue, FAN Xueling(), HE Wei
Received:
2021-06-01
Online:
2023-02-14
Published:
2023-05-25
摘要:
基于刻板印象内容模型和内隐领导理论, 本研究探讨了员工的愤怒表达类型对其领导力涌现的影响及其作用机制, 并提出愤怒表达之后的弥补策略, 从而把愤怒表达对领导力的影响从纵向领导力拓展至横向领导力。研究1 (N = 279)采用情景实验法, 设计2 (愤怒表达类型:合理愤怒表达vs.越轨愤怒表达) × 2 (愤怒道歉:是vs.否)和抑制愤怒5个情景; 研究2 (N = 200)采用关键事件法, 调查真实的员工发怒事件。研究3 (N = 354)通过3 (愤怒表达类型:间接愤怒vs.合理愤怒表达vs.越轨愤怒表达) × 2 (愤怒原因:利他vs.自利)和暗自愤怒7个情景的情景实验重复验证了研究2的结论, 并探讨了研究1和2结论不一致可能的原因, 但未发现愤怒原因的调节作用; 研究4开发了愤怒表达类型的测量量表, 并通过问卷方式采集西方样本, 除重复验证前3个研究的结论外, 亦发现了合理愤怒表达相比于抑制愤怒的间接愤怒对能力感知的正向作用。通过4个研究得出结论:合理愤怒表达与越轨愤怒表达相比更有利于同事对表达者温暖和能力的感知进而更利于表达者的领导力涌现; 而与抑制愤怒相比, 得出的发现较为复杂。最后, 愤怒道歉会通过增加温暖感知而促进领导力涌现。
中图分类号:
蒋旭婷, 吴小玥, 范雪灵, 贺伟. (2023). 员工愤怒表达对领导力涌现的影响:温暖和能力感知的中介作用以及愤怒道歉的弥补作用. 心理学报, 55(5), 812-830.
JIANG Xuting, WU Xiaoyue, FAN Xueling, HE Wei. (2023). Effects of coworker anger expression on leader emergence: The mediating roles of perceived warmth and competence and the compensating effect of anger apology. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 55(5), 812-830.
变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 表达者性别 | — | ||||||||||
2. 人际竞争 | 2.88 | 1.06 | −0.09 | (0.91) | |||||||
3. 愤怒类型 | 1.91 | 0.61 | −0.02 | −0.01 | — | ||||||
4. 抑制愤怒 | 0.24 | 0.43 | 0.02 | 0.02 | −0.83** | — | |||||
5. 越轨愤怒 | 0.15 | 0.35 | −0.01 | 0.01 | 0.74* | −0.23** | — | ||||
6. 愤怒道歉 | 2.62 | 1.27 | −0.03 | 0.07 | 0.00 | −0.02 | −0.02 | — | |||
7. 温暖感知 | 2.83 | 1.08 | −0.05 | −0.01 | −0.27** | 0.20** | −0.23** | 0.45** | (0.90) | ||
8. 能力感知 | 3.15 | 0.94 | −0.03 | 0.18** | −0.31** | 0.16* | −0.35** | 0.24** | 0.71** | (0.85) | |
9. 领导力涌现 | 2.59 | 1.06 | 0.05 | 0.19** | −0.19** | 0.01 | −0.32** | 0.31** | 0.62** | 0.71** | (0.92) |
表1 主要研究变量的均值、标准差、信度和相关性(研究2)
变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 表达者性别 | — | ||||||||||
2. 人际竞争 | 2.88 | 1.06 | −0.09 | (0.91) | |||||||
3. 愤怒类型 | 1.91 | 0.61 | −0.02 | −0.01 | — | ||||||
4. 抑制愤怒 | 0.24 | 0.43 | 0.02 | 0.02 | −0.83** | — | |||||
5. 越轨愤怒 | 0.15 | 0.35 | −0.01 | 0.01 | 0.74* | −0.23** | — | ||||
6. 愤怒道歉 | 2.62 | 1.27 | −0.03 | 0.07 | 0.00 | −0.02 | −0.02 | — | |||
7. 温暖感知 | 2.83 | 1.08 | −0.05 | −0.01 | −0.27** | 0.20** | −0.23** | 0.45** | (0.90) | ||
8. 能力感知 | 3.15 | 0.94 | −0.03 | 0.18** | −0.31** | 0.16* | −0.35** | 0.24** | 0.71** | (0.85) | |
9. 领导力涌现 | 2.59 | 1.06 | 0.05 | 0.19** | −0.19** | 0.01 | −0.32** | 0.31** | 0.62** | 0.71** | (0.92) |
变量 | 温暖感知 | 能力感知 | 领导力涌现 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B | SE | B | SE | B | SE | B | SE | B | SE | |
表达者性别 | −0.11 | 0.15 | −0.08 | 0.14 | −0.02 | 0.12 | 0.19* | 0.01 | 0.21+ | 0.11 |
人际竞争 | −0.02 | 0.07 | −0.05 | 0.07 | 0.16** | 0.06 | 0.12* | 0.05 | 0.20*** | 0.05 |
愤怒道歉 | 0.39*** | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.06 | ||||||
抑制愤怒 | 0.40* | 0.18 | 0.17 | 0.14 | −0.40** | 0.12 | ||||
越轨愤怒 | −0.61** | 0.22 | −0.89*** | 0.16 | −0.38** | 0.14 | ||||
温暖感知 | 0.30*** | 0.07 | 0.61*** | 0.06 | ||||||
能力感知 | 0.51*** | 0.09 |
表2 回归分析结果 (研究2)
变量 | 温暖感知 | 能力感知 | 领导力涌现 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B | SE | B | SE | B | SE | B | SE | B | SE | |
表达者性别 | −0.11 | 0.15 | −0.08 | 0.14 | −0.02 | 0.12 | 0.19* | 0.01 | 0.21+ | 0.11 |
人际竞争 | −0.02 | 0.07 | −0.05 | 0.07 | 0.16** | 0.06 | 0.12* | 0.05 | 0.20*** | 0.05 |
愤怒道歉 | 0.39*** | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.06 | ||||||
抑制愤怒 | 0.40* | 0.18 | 0.17 | 0.14 | −0.40** | 0.12 | ||||
越轨愤怒 | −0.61** | 0.22 | −0.89*** | 0.16 | −0.38** | 0.14 | ||||
温暖感知 | 0.30*** | 0.07 | 0.61*** | 0.06 | ||||||
能力感知 | 0.51*** | 0.09 |
变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 愤怒表达类型 | 1.85 | 0.84 | — | |||||
2. 抑制愤怒 | 0.43 | 0.50 | −0.89** | — | ||||
3. 越轨愤怒 | 0.29 | 0.45 | 0.87** | −0.55** | — | |||
4. 温暖感知 | 2.81 | 0.93 | −0.45** | 0.37** | −0.43** | (0.83) | ||
5. 能力感知 | 3.49 | 0.77 | −0.32** | 0.25** | −0.31** | 0.56** | (0.78) | |
6. 领导力涌现 | 3.51 | 0.70 | −0.06 | −0.02 | −0.13* | 0.44** | 0.63** | (0.66) |
表3 主要研究变量的均值、标准差、信度和相关性(研究3)
变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 愤怒表达类型 | 1.85 | 0.84 | — | |||||
2. 抑制愤怒 | 0.43 | 0.50 | −0.89** | — | ||||
3. 越轨愤怒 | 0.29 | 0.45 | 0.87** | −0.55** | — | |||
4. 温暖感知 | 2.81 | 0.93 | −0.45** | 0.37** | −0.43** | (0.83) | ||
5. 能力感知 | 3.49 | 0.77 | −0.32** | 0.25** | −0.31** | 0.56** | (0.78) | |
6. 领导力涌现 | 3.51 | 0.70 | −0.06 | −0.02 | −0.13* | 0.44** | 0.63** | (0.66) |
变量 | 温暖感知 | 能力感知 | 领导力涌现 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B | SE | B | SE | B | SE | |
抑制愤怒 | 0.35** | 0.11 | 0.17+ | 0.09 | −0.32*** | 0.06 |
越轨愤怒 | −0.67*** | 0.12 | −0.43*** | 0.12 | 0.03 | 0.08 |
温暖感知 | 0.16*** | 0.04 | ||||
能力感知 | 0.53*** | 0.05 |
表4 回归分析结果(研究3)
变量 | 温暖感知 | 能力感知 | 领导力涌现 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B | SE | B | SE | B | SE | |
抑制愤怒 | 0.35** | 0.11 | 0.17+ | 0.09 | −0.32*** | 0.06 |
越轨愤怒 | −0.67*** | 0.12 | −0.43*** | 0.12 | 0.03 | 0.08 |
温暖感知 | 0.16*** | 0.04 | ||||
能力感知 | 0.53*** | 0.05 |
变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 年龄(岁) | 38.33 | 10.51 | — | ||||||||||||
2. 性别 | −0.14* | — | |||||||||||||
3. 同事性别 | 0.51 | 0.56 | 0.03 | 0.30*** | — | ||||||||||
4. 共事时间 | 4.55 | 4.20 | 0.36*** | −0.11 | 0.06 | — | |||||||||
5. 敌对关系 | 1.83 | 1.13 | −0.16* | −0.07 | −0.06 | −0.09 | — | ||||||||
6. 任务依赖度 | 4.52 | 1.43 | −0.06 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.10 | 0.02 | — | |||||||
7. 组织消极情绪抑制规范 | 4.97 | 1.19 | 0.10 | 0.00 | −0.03 | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.03 | — | ||||||
8. 暗自愤怒 | 3.61 | 1.24 | −0.08 | −0.06 | −0.01 | −0.04 | −0.01 | 0.13* | −0.04 | — | |||||
9. 间接愤怒 | 4.31 | 1.14 | −0.10 | 0.11 | 0.19** | −0.17** | 0.08 | −0.16* | −0.09 | −0.18** | — | ||||
10. 合理愤怒表达 | 3.81 | 1.16 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.02 | −0.14* | 0.14* | −0.11 | 0.18** | 0.09 | — | |||
11. 越轨愤怒表达 | 3.22 | 1.45 | 0.07 | −0.05 | −0.13* | −0.03 | 0.18** | −0.18** | 0.11 | −0.48*** | 0.24*** | −0.21*** | — | ||
12. 温暖感知 | 4.88 | 1.36 | 0.04 | −0.06 | 0.04 | 0.09 | −0.27*** | 0.13* | −0.02 | 0.25*** | −0.15* | 0.21*** | −0.35*** | — | |
13. 能力感知 | 5.44 | 0.91 | −0.03 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.03 | −0.12 | 0.14* | −0.05 | 0.07 | −0.11 | 0.18** | −0.15* | 0.46*** | — |
14. 领导力涌现 | 4.65 | 1.41 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.09 | −0.11 | 0.26*** | 0.03 | 0.15* | −0.19** | 0.25*** | −0.20** | 0.62*** | 0.64*** |
表6 主要研究变量的均值、标准差和相关性(研究4)
变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 年龄(岁) | 38.33 | 10.51 | — | ||||||||||||
2. 性别 | −0.14* | — | |||||||||||||
3. 同事性别 | 0.51 | 0.56 | 0.03 | 0.30*** | — | ||||||||||
4. 共事时间 | 4.55 | 4.20 | 0.36*** | −0.11 | 0.06 | — | |||||||||
5. 敌对关系 | 1.83 | 1.13 | −0.16* | −0.07 | −0.06 | −0.09 | — | ||||||||
6. 任务依赖度 | 4.52 | 1.43 | −0.06 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.10 | 0.02 | — | |||||||
7. 组织消极情绪抑制规范 | 4.97 | 1.19 | 0.10 | 0.00 | −0.03 | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.03 | — | ||||||
8. 暗自愤怒 | 3.61 | 1.24 | −0.08 | −0.06 | −0.01 | −0.04 | −0.01 | 0.13* | −0.04 | — | |||||
9. 间接愤怒 | 4.31 | 1.14 | −0.10 | 0.11 | 0.19** | −0.17** | 0.08 | −0.16* | −0.09 | −0.18** | — | ||||
10. 合理愤怒表达 | 3.81 | 1.16 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.02 | −0.14* | 0.14* | −0.11 | 0.18** | 0.09 | — | |||
11. 越轨愤怒表达 | 3.22 | 1.45 | 0.07 | −0.05 | −0.13* | −0.03 | 0.18** | −0.18** | 0.11 | −0.48*** | 0.24*** | −0.21*** | — | ||
12. 温暖感知 | 4.88 | 1.36 | 0.04 | −0.06 | 0.04 | 0.09 | −0.27*** | 0.13* | −0.02 | 0.25*** | −0.15* | 0.21*** | −0.35*** | — | |
13. 能力感知 | 5.44 | 0.91 | −0.03 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.03 | −0.12 | 0.14* | −0.05 | 0.07 | −0.11 | 0.18** | −0.15* | 0.46*** | — |
14. 领导力涌现 | 4.65 | 1.41 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.09 | −0.11 | 0.26*** | 0.03 | 0.15* | −0.19** | 0.25*** | −0.20** | 0.62*** | 0.64*** |
变量 | 温暖感知 | 能力感知 | 领导力涌现 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B | SE | B | SE | B | SE | |
年龄 | −0.002 | 0.01 | −0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
性别 | −0.21 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.13 |
同事性别 | 0.05 | 0.15 | 0.09 | 0.11 | 0.01 | 0.12 |
共事时间 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.004 | 0.01 | −0.001 | 0.02 |
敌对关系 | −0.27** | 0.08 | −0.07 | 0.05 | 0.10 | 0.07 |
任务依赖度 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.12* | 0.05 |
组织消极情绪抑制规范 | 0.04 | 0.07 | −0.02 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 |
暗自愤怒 | 0.13+ | 0.08 | −0.01 | 0.06 | −0.002 | 0.06 |
间接愤怒 | −0.06 | 0.08 | −0.10+ | 0.06 | −0.11+ | 0.06 |
合理愤怒表达 | 0.14+ | 0.08 | 0.12* | 0.06 | 0.12* | 0.06 |
越轨愤怒表达 | −0.19** | 0.07 | −0.03 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.06 |
温暖感知 | 0.44*** | 0.05 | ||||
能力感知 | 0.64*** | 0.08 |
表7 回归分析结果(研究4)
变量 | 温暖感知 | 能力感知 | 领导力涌现 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B | SE | B | SE | B | SE | |
年龄 | −0.002 | 0.01 | −0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
性别 | −0.21 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.13 |
同事性别 | 0.05 | 0.15 | 0.09 | 0.11 | 0.01 | 0.12 |
共事时间 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.004 | 0.01 | −0.001 | 0.02 |
敌对关系 | −0.27** | 0.08 | −0.07 | 0.05 | 0.10 | 0.07 |
任务依赖度 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.12* | 0.05 |
组织消极情绪抑制规范 | 0.04 | 0.07 | −0.02 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 |
暗自愤怒 | 0.13+ | 0.08 | −0.01 | 0.06 | −0.002 | 0.06 |
间接愤怒 | −0.06 | 0.08 | −0.10+ | 0.06 | −0.11+ | 0.06 |
合理愤怒表达 | 0.14+ | 0.08 | 0.12* | 0.06 | 0.12* | 0.06 |
越轨愤怒表达 | −0.19** | 0.07 | −0.03 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.06 |
温暖感知 | 0.44*** | 0.05 | ||||
能力感知 | 0.64*** | 0.08 |
假设和补充分析 | 研究1 (N = 279 本土样本) | 研究2 (N = 200 本土样本) | 研究3 (N = 354 本土样本) | 研究4 (N = 248 西方样本) |
---|---|---|---|---|
假设1a 合理愤怒表达vs.抑制愤怒对温暖感知的负向作用 | 不显著 | 负向显著 | 负向显著 | 不显著 |
假设1b 合理愤怒表达vs.越轨愤怒表达对温暖感知的正向作用 | 不显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 |
假设2a 合理愤怒表达vs.抑制愤怒对能力感知的正向作用 | 负向显著 | 不显著 | 不显著 | 部分显著(间接愤怒) |
假设2b合理愤怒表达vs.越轨愤怒表达对能力感知的正向作用 | 边际显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 |
假设3a合理愤怒表达vs.抑制愤怒通过温暖感知对领导力涌现的负向作用 | 不显著 | 负向显著 | 负向显著 | 不显著 |
假设3b 合理愤怒表达vs.越轨愤怒表达通过温暖感知对领导力涌现的正向作用 | 不显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 |
假设4a 合理愤怒表达vs.抑制愤怒通过能力感知对领导力涌现的正向作用 | 负向显著 | 不显著 | 不显著 | 部分显著(间接愤怒) |
假设4b 合理愤怒表达vs.越轨愤怒表达通过能力感知对领导力涌现的正向作用 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 |
假设5a 愤怒道歉对温暖感知的正向作用 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | — | — |
假设5b 愤怒道歉通过温暖感知对领导力涌现的正向作用 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | — | — |
表8 四个研究结果对比
假设和补充分析 | 研究1 (N = 279 本土样本) | 研究2 (N = 200 本土样本) | 研究3 (N = 354 本土样本) | 研究4 (N = 248 西方样本) |
---|---|---|---|---|
假设1a 合理愤怒表达vs.抑制愤怒对温暖感知的负向作用 | 不显著 | 负向显著 | 负向显著 | 不显著 |
假设1b 合理愤怒表达vs.越轨愤怒表达对温暖感知的正向作用 | 不显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 |
假设2a 合理愤怒表达vs.抑制愤怒对能力感知的正向作用 | 负向显著 | 不显著 | 不显著 | 部分显著(间接愤怒) |
假设2b合理愤怒表达vs.越轨愤怒表达对能力感知的正向作用 | 边际显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 |
假设3a合理愤怒表达vs.抑制愤怒通过温暖感知对领导力涌现的负向作用 | 不显著 | 负向显著 | 负向显著 | 不显著 |
假设3b 合理愤怒表达vs.越轨愤怒表达通过温暖感知对领导力涌现的正向作用 | 不显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 |
假设4a 合理愤怒表达vs.抑制愤怒通过能力感知对领导力涌现的正向作用 | 负向显著 | 不显著 | 不显著 | 部分显著(间接愤怒) |
假设4b 合理愤怒表达vs.越轨愤怒表达通过能力感知对领导力涌现的正向作用 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 |
假设5a 愤怒道歉对温暖感知的正向作用 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | — | — |
假设5b 愤怒道歉通过温暖感知对领导力涌现的正向作用 | 正向显著 | 正向显著 | — | — |
[1] |
Badura, K. L., Grijalva, E., Galvin, B. M., Owens, B. P., & Joseph, D. L. (2020). Motivation to lead: A meta-analysis and distal-proximal model of motivation and leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(4), 331-354.
doi: 10.1037/apl0000439 pmid: 31393147 |
[2] | Bao, H.-W.-S. (2022). bruceR: Broadly useful convenient and efficient R functions. R package version 0.8.x. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=bruceR |
[3] | Bolino, M. C., Flores, M. L., Kelemen, T. K., & Bisel, R. S. (2022). May I please go the extra mile? Citizenship communication strategies and their effect on individual initiative OCB, work-family conflict, and partner satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2020.0581 |
[4] |
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185-216.
doi: 10.1177/135910457000100301 URL |
[5] |
Carstensen, L. L. (1992). Social and emotional patterns in adulthood: Support for socioemotional selectivity theory. Psychology and Aging, 7(3), 331-338.
doi: 10.1037//0882-7974.7.3.331 pmid: 1388852 |
[6] | Chen, G.-M. (2001). Toward transcultural understanding:A harmony theory of Chinese communication. In V. H.Milhouse, M. K.Asante, & P. O.Nwosu (Eds.), Transculture: Interdisciplinary perspectives on cross- cultural relations (pp. 55-70). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. |
[7] | Chen, G.-M. (2002). The impact of harmony on Chinese conflict management. In G. M.Chen & R.Ma (Eds.), Chinese conflict management and resolution (pp. 3-17). Westport, CONN: Ablex, |
[8] | Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. |
[9] |
Cronshaw, S. F., & Lord, R. G. (1987). Effects of categorization, attribution, and encoding processes on leadership perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(1), 97-106.
doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.72.1.97 URL |
[10] | Cuddy, A., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2008). Warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social perception: The stereotype content model and the bias map. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 61-149. |
[11] |
de Dreu, C. K. W., & Nauta, A. (2009). Self-interest and other-orientation in organizational behavior: Implications for job performance, prosocial behavior, and personal initiative. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), 913-926.
doi: 10.1037/a0014494 pmid: 19594234 |
[12] | DeRue, D. S., & Ashford, S. J. (2010). Who will lead and who will follow? A social process of leadership identity construction in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 627-647. |
[13] |
DeRue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., & Ashford, S. J. (2015). Interpersonal perceptions and the emergence of leadership structures in groups: A Network perspective. Organization Science, 26(4), 1192-1209.
doi: 10.1287/orsc.2014.0963 URL |
[14] |
Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2007). Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(1), 1-22.
doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.12.1.1 pmid: 17402809 |
[15] | Ekman, P. (1984). Expression and the nature of emotion. In K. R.Scherer & P.Ekman (Eds.), Approaches to emotion (pp: 319-344). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. |
[16] |
Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2004). Implicit leadership theories in applied settings: Factor structure, generalizability, and stability over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), 293-310.
pmid: 15065976 |
[17] |
Farrell, D. (1983). Exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect as responses to job dissatisfaction: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 26(4), 596-607.
doi: 10.2307/255909 URL |
[18] |
Fehr, R., & Gelfand, M. J. (2010). When apologies work: How matching apology components to victims’ self-construals facilitates forgiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113(1), 37-50.
doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.04.002 URL |
[19] |
Feng, C. (2019). Effectiveness and mechanism of leader anger in the workplace. Advances in Psychological Science, 27(11), 1917-1928.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.01917 |
[冯彩玲. (2019). 工作场所领导愤怒的有效性及其作用机制. 心理科学进展, 27(11), 1917-1928.]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.01917 |
|
[20] |
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878-902.
pmid: 12051578 |
[21] |
Fitness, J. (2000). Anger in the workplace: An emotion script approach to anger episodes between workers and their superiors, co-workers and subordinates. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(2), 147-162.
doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1379 URL |
[22] |
Frantz, C. M., & Bennigson, C. (2005). Better late than early: The influence of timing on apology effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(2), 201-207.
doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.07.007 URL |
[23] | Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions: Studies in emotion and social interaction. Cambridge: Maison des Sciences de l’Homme and Cambridge University Press. |
[24] | Gaertig, C., Barasch, A., Levine, E. E., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2019). When does anger boost status? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 85, Article 103876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103876 |
[25] |
Geddes, D., & Callister, R. R. (2007). Crossing the line(s): A dual threshold model of anger in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 721-746.
doi: 10.5465/amr.2007.25275495 URL |
[26] |
Gibson, D. E., & Callister, R. R. (2010). Anger in organizations: Review and integration. Journal of Management, 36(1), 66-93.
doi: 10.1177/0149206309348060 URL |
[27] | Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face- to-face behavior. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books. |
[28] | Gross, J. J. (2007). Handbook of emotion regulation. NY: The Guilford Press. |
[29] |
Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 348-362.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348 pmid: 12916575 |
[30] |
Huang, J. L., Curran, P. G., Keeney, J., Poposki, E. M., & DeShon, R. P. (2012). Detecting and deterring insufficient effort responding to surveys. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(1), 99-114.
doi: 10.1007/s10869-011-9231-8 URL |
[31] |
Izard, C. E. (1992). Basic emotions, relations among emotions, and emotion cognition relations. Psychological Review, 99(3), 561-565.
pmid: 1502277 |
[32] |
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765-780.
pmid: 12184579 |
[33] |
Kim, P. H., Ferrin, D. L., Cooper, C. D., & Dirks, K. T. (2004). Removing the shadow of suspicion: The effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence- versus integrity- based trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 104-118.
doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.104 URL |
[34] |
Klotz, A. C., & Bolino, M. C. (2016). Saying goodbye: The nature, causes, and consequences of employee resignation styles. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(10), 1386-1404.
pmid: 27336909 |
[35] | Lazare, A. (2004). On apology. New York: Oxford University Press. |
[36] | Lee Cunningham, J., Sonday, L., & Ashford, S. J. (2022). Do I dare? The psychodynamics of anticipated image risk, leader identity endorsement, and leader emergence. Academy of Management Journal, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2018.1258 |
[37] |
Lerner, J. S., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2006). Portrait of the angry decision maker: How appraisal tendencies shape anger’s influence on cognition. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19(2), 115-137.
doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0771 URL |
[38] |
Lewis, K. M. (2000). When leaders display emotion: How followers respond to negative emotional expression of male and female leaders. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(2), 221-234.
doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1379 URL |
[39] |
Liu, C., Nauta, M. M., Yang, L.-Q., & Spector, P.E. (2018). How do coworkers ‘make the place’? Examining coworker conflict and the value of harmony in China and the United States. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 67(1), 30-60.
doi: 10.1111/apps.2018.67.issue-1 URL |
[40] |
Liu, W., Song, Z., Li, X., & Liao, Z. (2017). Why and when leaders’ affective states influence employee upward voice. Academy of Management Journal, 60(1), 238-263.
doi: 10.5465/amj.2013.1082 URL |
[41] |
Liu, Y., Li, S., He, Y., Wang, D., & Yang, B. (2021). Eliminating threat or venting rage? The relationship between narcissism and aggression in violent offenders. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(3), 244-258.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00244 URL |
[刘宇平, 李姗珊, 何赟, 王豆豆, 杨波. (2021). 消除威胁或无能狂怒?自恋对暴力犯攻击的影响机制. 心理学报, 53(3), 244-258.]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00244 |
|
[42] |
Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & de Vader, C. L. (1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34(3), 343-378.
doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(84)90043-6 URL |
[43] |
Madera, J. M., & Smith, D. B. (2009). The effects of leader negative emotions on evaluations of leadership in a crisis situation: The role of anger and sadness. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(2), 103-114.
doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.01.007 URL |
[44] |
Melwani, S., Mueller, J. S., & Overbeck, J. R. (2012). Looking down: The influence of contempt and compassion on emergent leadership categorizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1171-1185.
doi: 10.1037/a0030074 pmid: 23025808 |
[45] |
Schaubroeck, J., & Jones, J. R. (2000). Antecedents of workplace emotional labor dimensions and moderators of their effects on physical symptoms. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(2), 163-183.
doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1379 URL |
[46] |
Schaubroeck, J. M., & Shao, P. (2012). The role of attribution in how followers respond to the emotional expression of male and female leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 27-42.
doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.11.003 URL |
[47] |
Shao, B., & Guo, Y. (2021). More than just an angry face: A critical review and theoretical expansion of research on leader anger expression. Human Relations, 74(10), 1661-1687.
doi: 10.1177/0018726720938123 URL |
[48] |
Song, X., Cheng, Y., Xie, Z., Gong, N., & Liu, L. (2021). The influence of anger on delay discounting: The mediating role of certainty and control. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(5), 456-468.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00456 |
[宋锡妍, 程亚华, 谢周秀甜, 龚楠焰, 刘雷. (2021). 愤怒情绪对延迟折扣的影响:确定感和控制感的中介作用. 心理学报, 53(5), 456-468.]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00456 |
|
[49] |
Tiedens, L. Z. (2001). Anger and advancement versus sadness and subjugation: The effect of negative emotion expressions on social status conferral. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(1), 86-94.
pmid: 11195894 |
[50] |
Tu, M.-H., Bono, J. E., Shum, C., & LaMontagne, L. (2018). Breaking the cycle: The effects of role model performance and ideal leadership self-concepts on abusive supervision spillover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(7), 689-702.
doi: 10.1037/apl0000297 URL |
[51] |
Tucker, S., Turner, N., Barling, J., Reid, E. M., & Elving, C. (2006). Apologies and transformational leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 63(2), 195-207.
doi: 10.1007/s10551-005-3571-0 URL |
[52] |
van der Vegt, G. S., & Janssen, O. (2003). Joint impact of interdependence and group diversity on innovation. Journal of Management, 29(5), 729-751.
doi: 10.1016/S0149-2063(03)00033-3 URL |
[53] |
van Doorn, J., Zeelenberg, M., & Breugelmans, S. M. (2014). Anger and prosocial behavior. Emotion Review, 6(3), 261-268.
doi: 10.1177/1754073914523794 URL |
[54] |
van Kleef, G. A. (2009). How emotions regulate social life: The emotions as social information (EASI) model. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(3), 184-188.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01633.x URL |
[55] |
van Kleef, G. A., van Doorn, E. A., Heerdink, M. W., & Koning, L. F. (2011). Emotion is for influence. European Review of Social Psychology, 22(1), 114-163.
doi: 10.1080/10463283.2011.627192 URL |
[56] |
Wang, L., Restubog, S., Shao, B., Lu, V., & van Kleef, G. A. (2018). Does anger expression help or harm leader effectiveness? The role of competence-based versus integrity-based violations and abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 61(3), 1050-1072.
doi: 10.5465/amj.2015.0460 URL |
[57] |
Xu, E., Huang, X., Jia, R., Xu, J., Liu, W., Graham, L., & Snape, E. (2020). The “evil pleasure”: Abusive supervision and third-party observers’ malicious reactions toward victims. Organization Science, 31(5), 1115-1137.
doi: 10.1287/orsc.2019.1349 URL |
[58] | Zhang, G., Yang, Y., Li, M., & Wu, J. (2019). Research on influence of perceived leader’s anger on employees’ proactive behavior. Business and Management Journal, 41(10), 108-122. |
[张光磊, 杨依蓝, 李铭泽, 吴健. (2019). 领导愤怒与员工主动性行为——一个非线性关系的检验. 经济管理, 41(10), 108-122.] |
[1] | 邹艳春, 章惠敏, 彭坚, 聂琦, 王震. 变革还是拖延?员工对不合规任务的差异化应对[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(9): 1529-1541. |
[2] | 徐敏亚, 刘贝妮, 徐振宇. 失却锋芒:父母性别偏见对女性职场表现的负面影响[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(7): 1148-1159. |
[3] | 祝养浩, 龙立荣, 刘文兴. 领导感激表达能提高员工的追随行为吗?情绪表达真诚性的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(7): 1160-1175. |
[4] | 马君, 朱梦霆. 命运天定还是逆天改命:探索劣势者成见的“傀儡效应”与“黑马效应”[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(6): 1029-1048. |
[5] | 李丽源, 高祥宇, 郑晓明. 员工积极主动行为的组态效应:基于过程的视角[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(5): 792-811. |
[6] | 董念念, 尹奎, 邢璐, 孙鑫, 董雅楠. 领导每日消极反馈对员工创造力的影响机制[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(5): 831-843. |
[7] | 付博, 彭坚, 梁潇杰, 陈丽芳, 于桂兰. 下属亲领导非伦理行为的持续与消退:基于领导反应的视角[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(5): 844-860. |
[8] | 宋琪, 张璐, 高莉芳, 程豹, 陈扬. “行高人非”还是“见贤思齐”?职场上行比较对员工行为的双刃剑效应[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(4): 658-670. |
[9] | 李其容, 李春萱, 杨艳宇. 创业进展与创业努力的多层次关系:创业自我效能的中介与调节定向的调节作用[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(4): 642-657. |
[10] | 李永瑞, 王铭, 宋佳谕. 群体断层激活及负面效应涌现:熙宁变法缘何从志同道合走向四分五裂?[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(2): 336-352. |
[11] | 龚诗阳, 张义博, 高月涛. 睡眠剥夺与购物后悔:来自大规模个体层面数据的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(2): 286-300. |
[12] | 刘智强, 许玉平, 许建伟, 周蓉, 龙立荣. 创新期望差距与团队突破性创新:自我调节理论视角[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(2): 272-285. |
[13] | 李超平, 孟雪, 胥彦, 蓝媛美. 家庭支持型主管行为对员工的影响与作用机制:基于元分析的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(2): 257-271. |
[14] | 杨焕, 卫旭华. 关系型人力资源管理实践对受益人利他行为的影响:基于道德补偿的视角[J]. 心理学报, 2022, 54(10): 1248-1261. |
[15] | 徐姗, 张昱城, 张冰然, 施俊琦, 袁梦莎, 任迎伟. “增益”还是“损耗”?挑战性工作要求对工作-家庭增益的“双刃剑”影响[J]. 心理学报, 2022, 54(10): 1234-1247. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||