社會閒散是普遍存在於團隊中的現象，學者們更將之稱為「社會之疾」 (Latane et al., 1979; Karau & Williams, 1993; Simms & Nichols, 2014)。而知覺閒散是指個人主觀感覺到他人貢獻少於預期的情況，將會對團隊績效造成不利的影響。因此，本研究以社會心理學相關文獻為基礎，檢視在知覺閒散時，其他團隊成員會傾向展現摸魚效應或是社會補償作為影響團隊績效的中介效果；同時，本研究納入認知信任與情感信任作為干擾變數，旨在釐清何種情況下，當知覺閒散發生時，能減少其他成員的摸魚效應、並增加社會補償的展現，進而為團隊帶來好的效果。此外，本研究在資料收集方面採兩階段、不同來源的方式，樣本取自各產業之團隊成員及其主管為研究對象，有效樣本為57組團隊資料 (共57位主管及190位團隊成員)。研究發現，在高認知信任或低情感信任時，知覺閒散會引發較高的摸魚效應；反之，在低認知信任或是高情感信任時，團隊成員間傾向展現社會補償，進而提高團隊績效。

When regarding others contributing less than expected, people are suffer from perceived loafing. Perceived loafing will cause negative effect on team performance. According to previous researches on social psychology, there are two possible behavioral reactions to perceived loafing, one is sucker effect ( i.e., in order not to take as a sucker, people tend to loaf as well when they think others did less effort); the other way is social compensation, (i.e., people will put more effort to compensate for others’ withholding). Meanwhile, we take team cognitive trust and affective trust as the moderating variables, with the aim of clarifying the boundary conditions to decrease sucker effect and enhance social compensation on the other hand.

In this study, we invited 57 team leaders and 190 team members from various industries, and collected data in two time frames to avoid common method variance. The result shows that (1) perceived loafing will trigger sucker effect under the condition of high cognitive trust or low affective trust; (2) when the cognitive trust in the team is low or affective trust is high, members are inclined to perform social compensation and cover up with the loafers.

目錄
論文審定書 ...........................................................................................i
論文公開授權書 ...........................................................................................ii
誌謝 ...........................................................................................iii
中文摘要 ...........................................................................................iv
英文摘要 ........................................................................................v
目 錄 .......................................................................................vi
圖 目 錄 ........................................................................................vii
表 目 錄 .......................................................................................viii
第一章 緒論 ........................................................................1
第二章 文獻探討 ........................................................................4
第一節 知覺閒散對團隊績效的影響 ........................................................................4
第二節 知覺閒散對團隊績效的影響路徑：摸魚效應的中介效果 ........................................................................5
第三節 知覺閒散對團隊績效的影響路徑：社會補償的中介效果........................................................................6
第四節 認知信任的差異式干擾效果 ........................................................................7
第五節 情感信任的差異式干擾效果 ........................................................................8
第六節 團隊中認知信任與情感信任的干擾式中介效果：知覺閒散透過摸魚效應或是社會補償對團隊績效的影響 ........................................................................9
第三章 研究方法 ........................................................................12
第一節 研究架構 ........................................................................12
第二節 研究樣本與施測程序 ........................................................................12
第三節 研究工具 ........................................................................14
第四節 資料分析方法 ........................................................................17
第四章 研究結果 ........................................................................18
第一節 各變數敘述性統計與相關係數 ........................................................................18
第二節 假設檢定 ........................................................................18
第五章 討論與建議 ....................................................................................... 27
第一節 研究發現與理論意涵 ........................................................... 27
第二節 管理意涵 ............................................................................... 29
第三節 研究限制與未來研究建議 ................................................... 30
參考文獻 ......................................................................................................... 32
附錄一 團隊成員問卷 ............................................................................... 37
附錄二 團隊主管問卷 ............................................................................... 42

參考文獻
一、中文文獻
林淑姬 (2008)，團隊設計特性與績效之關係－以多層次分析探討成員努力,、協調機制之中介影響 (II)，應用研究。
黃建銘 (2002)，組織內社會性偷懶現象之研究，中華行政學報，(1)，205-224。
彭台光, 高月慈, 林鉦棽 (2006)，管理研究中的共同方法變異：問題本質、影響、測試和補救，管理學報，23(1)，77-98。
蔡維奇, 紀乃文 (2008)，團隊情感氛圍形成的前因,、情境調節及個人層次後果變項之研究， 組織與管理, 1(1), 1-37。
二、英文文獻
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological bulletin, 88(3), 588.
Bluhm, D. J. (2009). Adaptive Consequences of Social Loafing. Academy of Management Proceedings. 1, 1-6.
Choi, J. N. (2006). Multilevel and cross-level effects of workplace attitudes and group member relations on interpersonal helping behavior. Human Performance, 19(4), 383-402.
Comer, D. R. (1995). A model of social loafing in real work groups. Human Relations, 48(6), 647-667.
Edmondson, A. C (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 350-383
Erdem, F., Ozen, J. (2003). Cognitive and affective dimensions of trust in developing team performance. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 9(5/6), 131–135
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. MA: Addison-Wesley.
Hart, J. W., Karau, S. J., Stasson, M. F., & Kerr, N. A. (2004). Achievement Motivation, Expected Coworker Performance, and Collective Task Motivation: Working Hard or Hardly Working? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(5), 984-1000.
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling.
Hung, T. K., Chi, N. W., & Lu, W. L. (2009). Exploring the relationships between perceived coworker loafing and counterproductive work behaviors: The mediating role of a revenge motive. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24(3), 257-270.
Jackson, J. M., & Harkins, S. G. (1985). Equity in Effort: An Explanation of the Social Loafing Effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(5), 1199-1206
Jassawalla, A., Sashittal, H., & Sashittal, A. (2009). Students' perceptions of social loafing: Its antecedents and consequences in undergraduate business classroom teams. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(1), 42-54.
Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of management journal, 44(2), 238-251.
Johnson, D., & Grayson, K. (2005). Cognitive and affective trust in service relationships. Journal of Business research, 58(4), 500-507.
Kahle, D. (2000). Teaching your organization to learn. Agency Sales Magazine, 30(9), 61-64.
Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 681-706.
Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1997). The effects of group cohesiveness on social loafing and social compensation. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1, 156-168.
Kerr, N. L. (1983). Motivation losses in small groups: A social dilemma analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 819-828.
Kidwell, R. E., & Bennett, N. (1993). Employee propensity to withhold effort: A conceptual model to intersect three avenues of research. Academy of management review, 18(3), 429-456.
Latane’, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 822-832.
Lewis, J. D., & Weigert, A. (1985). Trust as a social reality. Social forces, 63(4), 967-985.
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Jaworski, R. A., & Bennett, N. (2004). Social loafing: A field investigation. Journal of Management, 30(2), 285-304.
McAllister, D.J. (1995). Affect and cognition based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24‐59.
Meyer, B., Schermuly, C. C., & Kauffeld, S. (2016). That’s not my place: The interacting effects of faultlines, subgroup size, and social competence on social loafing behaviour in work groups. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 25(1), 31-49.
Mulvey, P. W., & Klein, H. J. (1998). The impact of perceived loafing and collective efficacy on group goal processes and group performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 74(1), 62-87.
Orbell, J., & Dawes, R. (1981). Social dilemmas. Progress in applied social psychology, 1, 37-65.
Plaks, J. E., & Higgins, E. T. (2000). Pragmatic use of stereotyping in teamwork: Social loafing and compensation as a function of inferred partner–situation fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 962.
Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate behavioral research, 42(1), 185-227.
Robbins, T. L. (1995). Social loafing on cognitive tasks: An examination of the “sucker effect”. Journal of Business and Psychology, 9(3), 337-342.
Schippers, M. C. (2014). Social Loafing Tendencies and Team Performance: The Compensating Effect of Agreeableness and Conscientiousness. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13(1), 62–81.
Schnake, M. E. (1991). Equity in effort: The" sucker effect" in co-acting groups. Journal of Management, 17(1), 41-55.
Soran, S., & Caymaz, E. (2014). Dark Side of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB): Testing a Model between OCB, Social Loafing, and Organizational Commitment. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 5(5).
Shepperd, J. A. (1993). Productivity loss in groups: A motivation analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 67-81.
Simms, A., & Nichols, T. (2014). Social loafing: a review of the literature. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 15(1), 58.
Stewart, G. L. (2006). A meta-analytic review of relationships between team design feature and team performance. Journal of Management, 32, 29-54
Todd, A. R., Seok, D. H., Kerr, N. L., & Messé, L. A. (2006). Social compensation: Fact or social-comparison artifact? Group processes & intergroup relations, 9(3), 431-442.
West, M. A. (2012). Effective teamwork: Practical lessons from organizational research. John Wiley & Sons.
Williams, K. D., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Social loafing and social compensation: The effects of expectations of co-worker performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 570-581.