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

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.00844

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

下属做出亲领导非伦理行为后, 该行为究竟会持续还是消退?本研究以领导“报”为切入点, 检验领导反应(感激驱动的资源回报与愧疚驱动的惩罚)在下属亲领导非伦理行为持续与消退中的关键作用。情景模拟实验(研究1, N = 120)结果表明, 当领导正直水平较低时, 亲领导非伦理行为诱发领导感激之情与资源回报, 进而导致下属的后续亲领导非伦理行为增加; 然而, 当领导正直水平较高时, 亲领导非伦理行为诱发领导愧疚之情与惩罚行为, 进而导致下属的后续亲领导非伦理行为减少。为提高研究结果的外部效度, 本文开展了两项互补的实地问卷调查, 即四轮问卷调查(研究2, N = 277)与持续2周的日记调查(研究3, N_个体内 = 733, N_个体间 = 87), 再次重复支持了上述研究结果。本研究从领导反应视角拓展了学界对下属亲领导非伦理行为的认识与理解。

关键词: 亲领导非伦理行为, 领导资源回报, 领导惩罚, 领导感激, 领导愧疚, 领导正直, “报”文化

Abstract:

Unethical pro-supervisor behavior refers to actions that are intended to promote the effective functioning of leaders and violate core societal values, mores, laws, or standards of proper conduct. Although subordinates’ unethical pro-supervisor behavior protects the personal interest of supervisors in the short term, it can be detrimental to the reputation of the supervisor and the company in the long term, thus hindering the high-quality development of the organization. Existing research has devoted considerable efforts to the antecedents of unethical pro-supervisor behavior. However, few studies have explored the consequences of unethical pro-supervisor behavior, which leads to an unanswered research question: will a subordinate engaging in unethical pro-supervisor behavior persist in this behavior in the future? This study aims to investigate supervisors’ responses to subordinates’ unethical pro-supervisor behavior and how these responses shape subsequent unethical pro-supervisor behavior. Drawing on the “Bao” theory, we proposed that supervisors have two paradoxical responses (gratitude-driven resource rewards versus guilt-driven punishment) to their subordinates’ unethical pro-supervisor behavior, which depends on supervisors’ integrity. Supervisors with high levels of integrity will respond to their subordinates who engage in unethical pro-supervisor behavior with guilt-driven punishment (a negative “Bao”), which reduces subordinates’ subsequent unethical pro-supervisor behavior. In contrast, supervisors with low levels of integrity will respond to their subordinates who engage in unethical pro-supervisor behavior with gratitude-driven resource rewards (a positive “Bao”), which increases subordinates’ subsequent unethical pro-supervisor behavior. We conducted three studies. In Study 1, we conducted a scenario-based experiment to explore initial evidence for our hypotheses. In the scenario-based experiment, 120 pairs of subjects played the supervisor role and employee role. The results showed that when the level of supervisors’ integrity was lower, subordinates’ unethical pro-supervisor behavior increased supervisors’ resource rewards through supervisors’ gratitude, which, in turn, increased subordinates’ subsequent unethical pro-supervisor behavior (i.e., the positive change in UPSB). However, when the level of supervisors’ integrity was higher, subordinates’ unethical pro-supervisor behavior increased supervisors’ punishment through supervisors’ guilt, which, in turn, reduced subordinates’ subsequent unethical pro-supervisor behavior. Study 1 established the internal validity of our findings. However, its external validity is limited. Hence, we conducted a cross-sectional survey study (Study 2: four-wave data from 277 supervisor-subordinate dyads) and a diary survey study (Study 3: data from 87 supervisor-subordinate dyads over 10 working days). Mplus 8.0 was used to analyze the data. Our hypotheses were supported again. This research has several theoretical implications. First, we introduced the perspective of supervisor response (i.e., supervisors’ emotional and behavioral responses) to examine the consequences of subordinates’ unethical pro-supervisor behavior, which advances the literature on unethical pro-supervisor behavior. Second, based on Bao’s theory, we explain how supervisors paradoxically respond to subordinates’ unethical pro-supervisor behavior. In doing so, this research contributes to the development of Chinese indigenous management theory. Third, we identified that the moral quality of supervisors (supervisors’ integrity) plays an important role in determining supervisors’ responses to subordinates’ unethical pro-supervisor behavior.

Key words: unethical pro-supervisor behavior, supervisor resource reward, supervisor punishment, gratitude, guilt, supervisor integrity, Bao theory.

中图分类号:

B849: C93

付博, 彭坚, 梁潇杰, 陈丽芳, 于桂兰. (2023). 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. 心理学报, 55(5), 844-860.

FU Bo, PENG Jian, LIANG Xiaojie, CHEN Lifang, YU Guilan. (2023). Reinforcement and extinction of unethical pro-supervisor behavior: Based on the perspective of supervisor response. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 55(5), 844-860.

图/表 12

参考文献 69

[1]	Athota, V. S., O'Connor, P. J., & Roberts, R. D. (2017). To punish first and reward second: Values determine how reward and punishment affect risk-taking behavior. American Journal of Psychology, 130(3), 303-313.
[2]	Barclay, L. J., Skarlicki, D. P., & Pugh, S. D. (2005). Exploring the role of emotions in injustice perceptions and retaliation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 629-643. pmid: 16060783
[3]	Bartlett, M. Y., & DeSteno, D. (2006). Gratitude and prosocial behavior: Helping when it costs you. Psychological Science, 17(4), 319-325. pmid: 16623689
[4]	Bauer, D. J., Preacher, K. J., & Gil, K. M. (2006). Conceptualizing and testing random indirect effects and moderated mediation in multilevel models: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 11(2), 142-163. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.11.2.142 pmid: 16784335
[5]	Behrendt, H., & Ben-Ari, R. (2012). The positive side of negative emotion: The role of guilt and shame in coping with interpersonal conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 56(6), 1116-1138. doi: 10.1177/0022002712445746 URL
[6]	Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
[7]	Brockner, J., Greenberg, J., Brockner, A., Bortz, J., Davy, J., & Carter, C. (1986). Layoffs, equity theory, and work performance: Further evidence of the impact of survivor guilt. Academy of Management Journal, 29(2), 373-384. doi: 10.2307/256193 URL
[8]	Bryant, W., & Merritt, S. M. (2021). Unethical pro- organizational behavior and positive leader-employee relationships. Journal of Business Ethics, 168(4), 777-793. doi: 10.1007/s10551-019-04211-x
[9]	Cheng, K., Lin, Y., Xia, Q., & Guo, L. (2021). How does supervisor-subordinate guanxi influence unethical pro- supervisor behavior? A study based on the chinese cultural context. Foreign Economics & Management, 43(4), 34-49.
	[程垦, 林英晖, 夏青, 郭利敏. (2021). 上下级关系如何影响亲上级非伦理行为?——基于中国文化情境的研究. 外国经济与管理, 43(4), 34-49.]
[10]	Cole, N. D. (2008). The effects of differences in explanations, employee attributions, type of infraction, and discipline severity on perceived fairness of employee discipline. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 25(2), 107-120. doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1936-4490 URL
[11]	Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874-900. doi: 10.1177/0149206305279602 URL
[12]	Fehr, R., Welsh, D., Yam, K. C., Baer, M., Wei, W., & Vaulont, M. (2019). The role of moral decoupling in the causes and consequences of unethical pro-organizational behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 153, 27-40. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.05.007 URL
[13]	Fu, B., Peng, J., & Chen, Z. (2021). The formation and prevention of unethical pro-Supervisor behavior from the perspective of chinese bao culture. Chinese Journal of Management, 18(11), 1629-1639.
	[付博, 彭坚, 陈挚. (2021). 中国 “报” 文化视角下亲领导非伦理行为的形成与防范研究. 管理学报, 18(11), 1629-1639.]
[14]	Gao, L. M., & Wang, L. (2013). Does favoritism leadership style is effective? ——Cultural adaptability analysis and theoretical extension of the chaxu leadership. Business Management Journal, 33(4), 183-194.
	[高良谋, 王磊. (2013). 偏私的领导风格是否有效?——基于差序式领导的文化适应性分析与理论延展. 经济管理, 35(4), 183-194. ]
[15]	Ghorbani, M., Liao, Y., Çayköylü, S., & Chand, M. (2013). Guilt, shame, and reparative behavior: The effect of psychological proximity. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(2), 311-323. doi: 10.1007/s10551-012-1350-2 URL
[16]	Grant, A. M., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2010). I won’t let you down… or will I? core self-evaluations, other-orientation, anticipated guilt and gratitude, and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 108-121. doi: 10.1037/a0017974 pmid: 20085409
[17]	Greenbaum, R., Bonner, J., Gray, T., & Mawritz, M. (2020). Moral emotions: A review and research agenda for management scholarship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 41(2), 95-114. doi: 10.1002/job.v41.2 URL
[18]	Halbusi, H., Williams, K. A., Ramayah, T., Aldieri, L., & Vinci, C. P. (2020). Linking ethical leadership and ethical climate to employees' ethical behavior: The moderating role of person-organization fit. Personnel Review, 50(1), 159-185. doi: 10.1108/PR-09-2019-0522 URL
[19]	Ilies, R., Peng, A. C., Savani, K., & Dimotakis, N. (2013). Guilty and helpful: An emotion-based reparatory model of voluntary work behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(6), 1051-1059. doi: 10.1037/a0034162 pmid: 24041120
[20]	Izard, C. E., Dougherty, F. E., Bloxon, B. M., & Kotsch, W. E. (1974). The diﬀerential emotions scale: A method of measuring the subjective experience of discrete emotions. Nasvhille, TN: Vanderbilt University Press
[21]	Jia, L. D., You, S. Y., Liu, D. P., Zheng, Y., & Li, Y. X. (2015). Building the confidence of Chinese management theory - a cross-level dialogue process theory from individual, team to academic community. Management World, (1), 99-117.
	[贾良定, 尤树洋, 刘德鹏, 郑祎, 李珏兴. (2015). 构建中国管理学理论自信之路——从个体、团队到学术社区的跨层次对话过程理论. 管理世界, (1), 99-117. ]
[22]	Johnson, H. H., & Umphress, E. E. (2019). To help my supervisor: Identification, moral identity, and unethical pro-supervisor behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2), 519-534. doi: 10.1007/s10551-018-3836-z
[23]	Krehbiel, P. J., & Cropanzano, R. (2000). Procedural justice, outcome favorability and emotion. Social Justice Research, 13(4), 339-360. doi: 10.1023/A:1007670909889 URL
[24]	Li, S., Jain, K., & Tzini, K. (2022). When supervisor support backfires: The link between perceived supervisor support and unethical pro-supervisor behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 179, 133-151. doi: 10.1007/s10551-021-04797-1
[25]	Liu, Z. M. (1992). The concept of Bao and its significance in organizational research. In C. Freksa, C. Habel, & K. F. Wender (Eds.), Lecture notes in artificial intelligence: Vol. 1404: Spatial cognition: An interdisciplinary approach to representing and processing spatial knowledge (pp.293- 318). Taiwan: Guiguan Publications.
	[刘兆明. (1992). 报的概念及其在组织研究上的意义. 见: 杨国枢, 宇安邦 (主编). 中国人的心理与行为: 理念及方法篇(pp.293-318). 台湾: 桂冠图书公司.]
[26]	Livingston, B. A., & Judge, T. A. (2008). Emotional responses to work-family conflict: An examination of gender role orientation working men and women. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 207-216. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.207 pmid: 18211146
[27]	Ma, L., & Tsui, A. S. (2015). Traditional Chinese philosophies and contemporary leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(1), 13-24. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.11.008 URL
[28]	Martin, G. S., Keating, M. A., Resick, C. J., Szabo, E., Kwan, H. K., & Peng, C. (2013). The meaning of leader integrity: A comparative study across Anglo, Asian, and Germanic cultures. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(3), 445-461. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.02.004 URL
[29]	Matta, F. K., Scott, B. A., Koopman, J., & Conlon, D. E. (2015). Does seeing “eye to eye” affect work engagement and organizational citizenship behavior? A role theory perspective on LMX agreement. Academy of Management Journal, 58(6), 1686-1708. doi: 10.5465/amj.2014.0106 URL
[30]	Mesdaghinia, S., Rawat, A., & Nadavulakere, S. (2019). Why moral followers quit: Examining the role of leader bottom-line mentality and unethical pro-leader behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2), 491-505. doi: 10.1007/s10551-018-3812-7
[31]	Moorman, R. H., Darnold, T. C., & Priesemuth, M. (2013). Perceived leader integrity: Supporting the construct validity and utility of a multi-dimensional measure in two samples. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(3), 427-444. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.02.003 URL
[32]	Nawfel, A., & Yang, Q. X. (2021). The role of moral identity in auditor's ethical decision making. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science, 10(2), 157-169.
[33]	Peng, H., & Wei, F. (2019). How and when does leader behavioral integrity influence employee voice? The roles of team independence climate and corporate ethical values. Journal of Business Ethics, 166(3), 505-521. doi: 10.1007/s10551-019-04114-x
[34]	Podsakoff, P. M. (1982). Determinants of a supervisor's use of rewards and punishmens: A literature review and suggestions for further research. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 29(1), 58-83. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(82)90242-2 URL
[35]	Podsakoff, P. M., Todor, W. D., Grover, R. A., & Huber, V. L. (1984). Situational moderators of leader reward and punishment behaviors: Fact or fiction. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34(1), 21-63. pmid: 10267503
[36]	Rockstuhl, T., Dulebohn, J. H., Ang, S., & Shore, L. M. (2012). Leader-member exchange (LMX) and culture: A meta- analysis of correlates of LMX across 23 countries. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1097-1130. doi: 10.1037/a0029978 pmid: 22985117
[37]	Rothschild, Z. K., Landau, M. J., Sullivan, D., & Keefer, L. A. (2012). A dual-motive model of scapegoating: Displacing blame to reduce guilt or increase control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(6), 1148-1163. doi: 10.1037/a0027413 pmid: 22545745
[38]	Shao, B. (2019). Moral anger as a dilemma? An investigation on how leader moral anger influences follower trust. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(3), 365-382. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.10.002 URL
[39]	Spence, J. R., Brown, D. J., Keeping, L. M., & Lian, H. (2014). Helpful today, but not tomorrow? Feeling grateful as a predictor of daily organizational citizenship behaviors. Personnel Psychology, 67(3), 705-738.
[40]	Stearns, D. C., & Parrott, G. W. (2012). When feeling bad makes you look good: Guilt, shame, and person perception. Cognition and Emotion, 26(3), 407-430. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2012.675879 pmid: 22471849
[41]	Tan, C. T., & Wu, J. (2022). A study on the impact of secure-base leadership on employee helping behavior. Human Resource Development Journal of China, 39(9), 54-67.
	[谭春平, 吴靳. (2022). 安全基地型领导对员工帮助行为的影响研究. 中国人力资源开发, 39(9), 54-67.]
[42]	Tang, P. M., Yam, K. C., & Koopman, J. (2020). Feeling proud but guilty? Unpacking the paradoxical nature of unethical pro-organizational behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 160, 68-86. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.03.004 URL
[43]	Tang, P. M., Yam, K. C., Koopman, J., & Ilies, R. (2022). Admired and disgusted? Third parties’ paradoxical emotional reactions and behavioral consequences towards others’ unethical pro-organizational behavior. Personnel Psychology, 75(1), 33-67. doi: 10.1111/peps.v75.1 URL
[44]	Tangney, J. P., Miller, R. S., Flicker, L., & Barlow, D. H. (1996). Are shame, guilt, and embarrassment distinct emotions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(6), 1256-1269. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.70.6.1256 pmid: 8667166
[45]	Treviño, L. K., Hartman, L. P., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review, 42(4), 128-142. doi: 10.2307/41166057 URL
[46]	Veetikazhi, R., Kamalanabhan, T. J., Malhotra, P., Arora, R., & Mueller, A. (2021). Unethical employee behaviour: A review and typology. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 33(10), 1976-2018.
[47]	Wang, H., Law, K., Hackett, R., Wang, D., & Chen, Z. (2005). Leader-member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers' performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 420-432. doi: 10.5465/amj.2005.17407908 URL
[48]	Wang, T., Xu, H. Y., & Song, M. (2018). How does leader’s behavioral integrity affect follower’s loyalty? An investigation based on traditional Chinese “Bao” culture. Management Review, 30(4), 106-119.
	[王震, 许灏颖, 宋萌. (2018). “说话算话”的领导让下属更效忠: 中国传统“报”文化视角下的领导言行一致与下属忠诚. 管理评论, 30(4), 106-119. ]
[49]	Wang, Z. J. (2009). A multi-level study of supervisor- subordinate guanxi and effects (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Huazhong Normal University, China.
	[王忠军. (2009). 主管-下属关系及其效果的多层次研究 (博士学位论文). 华中师范大学.]
[50]	Wang, Z. J., Long, L. R., & Liu, L. D. (2011). Operation mechanism and effects of supervisor-subordinate guanxi in Chinese organizations. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 43(7), 798-809.
	[王忠军, 龙立荣, 刘丽丹. (2011). 组织中主管-下属关系的运作机制与效果. 心理学报, 43(7), 798-809. ]
[51]	Wei, X. H., & Zou, Y. (2020). When is the concealment between close colleagues terminated? The boundary condition of the effect of guanxi on whistle-blowing intention. Journal of Psychological Science, 43(2), 423-429.
	[卫旭华, 邹意. (2020). 亲亲相隐何时休?关系对揭发意向影响的边界. 心理科学, 43(2), 423-429.]
[52]	Weiss, H. M., Suckow, K., & Cropanzano, R. (1999). Effects of justice conditions on discrete emotions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(5), 786-794. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.84.5.786 URL
[53]	Wen, C. Y. (1982). Gratitude and revenge: An analysis of exchange behavior. Yang Guoshu, Wen Chongyi. Sinicization of social and behavioral research (pp. 311-344). Taipei: Institute of Ethnology, Academia Sinica.
	[文崇一. (1982). 报恩与复仇:交换行为的分析. 见:杨国枢, 文崇一 (主编). 社会及行为科学研究的中国化(pp. 311-344). 台北: 中央研究院民族学研究所.]
[54]	Wright, T. A., Quick, J. C., Hannah, S. T., & Hargrove, M. (2017). Best practice recommendations for scale construction in organizational research: The development and initial validation of the character strength inventory (CSI). Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(5), 615-628. doi: 10.1002/job.v38.5 URL
[55]	Xu, S., Zhang, Y. C., Zhang, B. R., Shi, J. Q., Yuan, M. S., & Ren, Y. W. (2022). Gain or Loss? Examining the double- edged sword effect of challenge demand on work-family enrichment. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 54(10), 1234-1247. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.01234 URL
	[徐姗, 张昱城, 张冰然, 施俊琦, 袁梦莎, 任迎伟. (2022). “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. 心理学报, 54(10), 1234-1247.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.01234
[56]	Yan, A. M., & Zeng, S. S. (2018). The antecedents of unethical pro-supervisor behavior: The influence of transformational leadership. Human Resources Development of China, 35(9), 63-72.
	[颜爱民, 曾莎莎. (2018). 亲领导非伦理行为的成因:来自变革型领导的影响. 中国人力资源开发, 35(9), 63-72. ]
[57]	Yang, F., Liu, J., Wang, Z., & Zhang, Y. (2019). Feeling energized: A multilevel model of spiritual leadership, leader integrity, relational energy, and job performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 158(4), 983-997. doi: 10.1007/s10551-017-3713-1
[58]	Yang, G. S., & Yu, A. B. (Eds). (1993). Chinese psychology and behavior: Ideas and methods. Taiwan: Guiguan Publications.
	[杨国枢, 余安邦. (主编). (1993). 中国人的心理与行为: 理念及方法篇. 台湾: 桂冠图书公司出版.]
[59]	Yang, L. S. (2009). The significance of Bao Bao Bao in Chinese culture. Guizhou people’s Publishing House, China.
	[杨联陞. (2009). 中国文化中“报”“保”“包”之意义(钱宾四先生学术文化讲座). 贵州人民出版社.]
[60]	Zarghamifard, M., & Danaeefard, H. (2020). What drives leader integrity? International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, 14(1), 1-33.
[61]	Zhai, X. W. (2007). The dimension of Bao’s work in China. Sociological Studies, (1), 83-98+244.
	[翟学伟. (2007). 报的运作方位. 社会学研究, (1), 83-98 +244.]
[62]	Zhan, X., & Liu, Y. (2022). Impact of employee pro-organizational unethical behavior on performance evaluation rated by supervisor: A moderated mediation model of supervisor bottom-line mentality. Chinese Management Studies, 16(1), 102-118. doi: 10.1108/CMS-07-2020-0299 URL
[63]	Zhang, G., Mao, J., & Hong, B. (2022). When will an unethical follower receive poor performance ratings? It depends on the leader’s moral characteristics. Ethics & Behavior, 32(5), 413-430.
[64]	Zhang, X., Li, N., & Brad Harris, T. (2015). Putting non-work ties to work: The case of guanxi in supervisor-subordinate relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(1), 37-54. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.04.008 URL
[65]	Zhang, Z. T., Liu, N., & Ding, M. Z. (2018). An empirical study on the effects of leadership non-contingent punishment on employee organizational identification. Management World, 34(1), 127-138+192.
	[张正堂, 刘宁, 丁明智. (2018). 领导非权变惩罚行为对员工组织认同影响的实证研究. 管理世界, 34(1), 127-138+192. ]
[66]	Zhong, X., & Wang, T. (2019). The relationship between self-sacrificial leadership and unethical pro-supervisor behavior. Contemporary Economic Management, 41(11), 60-67.
	[钟熙, 王甜. (2019). 自我牺牲型领导对员工亲领导非伦理行为的影响. 当代经济管理, 41(11), 60-67. ]
[67]	Zhu, S. L., Long, L. R., He, W., & Wang, Z. J. (2015). Beyond the instrumental exchange, the family-like employee- organization relationship in Chinese firms: Theory building and empirical investigation. Management World, (11), 119-134+160+187-188.
	[朱苏丽, 龙立荣, 贺伟, 王忠军. (2015). 超越工具性交换: 中国企业员工-组织类亲情交换关系的理论建构与实证研究. 管理世界, (11), 119-134+160+187-188.]
[68]	Zou, W. C., Tian, Q., & Liu, J. (2012). Give a plum in return for a peach: A review of reciprocity theory of organizational behavior. Advances in Psychological Science, 20(11), 1879-1888. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2012.01879 URL
	[邹文篪, 田青, 刘佳. (2012). “投桃报李”——互惠理论的组织行为学研究述评. 心理科学进展, 20(11), 1879-1888.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2012.01879
[69]	Zou, Y., Zhang, H. M., Chen, X., & Zeng, X. (2022). How to manage subordinates' emotions? The strategies and influences of leader interpersonal emotion management. Human Resource Development Journal of China, 39(7), 88-106.
	[邹艳春, 章惠敏, 陈晓, 曾晓晴. (2022). 如何管理下属情绪?领导者人际情绪管理的策略与影响. 中国人力资源开发, 39(7), 88-106.]

变量	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1. 下属初始UPSB
2. 领导愧疚	0.50^***
3. 领导感激	0.46^***	0.11
4. 领导正直	0.00	0.19^*	−0.15
5. 领导资源回报	0.43^***	−0.05	0.66^***	−0.19^*
6. 领导惩罚	0.51^***	0.69^***	−0.03	0.23^*	−0.09
7. 下属UPSB改变量	−0.62^***	−0.66^***	−0.02	−0.24^**	0.14	−0.73^***
均值	0.50	3.08	2.90	0.50	1.33	1.23	1.41
标准差	0.50	1.13	1.10	0.50	1.16	1.45	0.97

变量	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1. 下属初始UPSB
2. 领导愧疚	0.50^***
3. 领导感激	0.46^***	0.11
4. 领导正直	0.00	0.19^*	−0.15
5. 领导资源回报	0.43^***	−0.05	0.66^***	−0.19^*
6. 领导惩罚	0.51^***	0.69^***	−0.03	0.23^*	−0.09
7. 下属UPSB改变量	−0.62^***	−0.66^***	−0.02	−0.24^**	0.14	−0.73^***
均值	0.50	3.08	2.90	0.50	1.33	1.23	1.41
标准差	0.50	1.13	1.10	0.50	1.16	1.45	0.97

变量	中介变量				因变量
变量	领导感激	领导愧疚	领导资源回报	领导惩罚	下属UPSB改变量
自变量
下属初始UPSB	0.46^***	0.50^***	0.20^**	0.26^***	−0.52^***
中介变量
领导感激			0.50^***		0.02
领导愧疚				0.49^***	−0.17+
领导资源回报					0.30^***
领导惩罚					−0.29^***
调节变量
领导正直	−0.15	0.19^*	−0.11	0.14^*	−0.08
领导正直下属初始UPSB	−0.22^**	0.22^**	−0.19^**	0.22^**	−0.04
R²	0.28^***	0.33^***	0.50^***	0.57^***	0.70^***

变量	中介变量				因变量
变量	领导感激	领导愧疚	领导资源回报	领导惩罚	下属UPSB改变量
自变量
下属初始UPSB	0.46^***	0.50^***	0.20^**	0.26^***	−0.52^***
中介变量
领导感激			0.50^***		0.02
领导愧疚				0.49^***	−0.17+
领导资源回报					0.30^***
领导惩罚					−0.29^***
调节变量
领导正直	−0.15	0.19^*	−0.11	0.14^*	−0.08
领导正直下属初始UPSB	−0.22^**	0.22^**	−0.19^**	0.22^**	−0.04
R²	0.28^***	0.33^***	0.50^***	0.57^***	0.70^***

模型	领导正直
模型	高分组(+1 SD)	低分组(−1 SD)	两组差值
下属初始UPSB→领导感激→领导资源回报→ 下属UPSB改变量	0.04 95% CI [0.01, 0.09]	0.07^** 95% CI [0.03, 0.13]	−0.03^* 95% CI [−0.07, −0.01]
下属初始UPSB→领导愧疚→领导惩罚→ 下属UPSB改变量	−0.10^** 95% CI [−0.18, −0.04]	−0.07^** 95% CI [−0.13, −0.03]	−0.03^* 95% CI [−0.07, −0.01]