本研究以解釋水平理論 (construal level theory) 觀點切入，探討在不同的時間距離下，主、客觀的工作屬性對求職者工作選擇的影響是否有所改變，並探討求職者的未來時間觀是否對此影響具調節效果。過去研究顯示，抽象的訊息在時間距離遠的情況下效果較強，而具體的訊息在時間距離近的情況下較有效果；且對具未來時間觀較高的人來說，時間距離與工作屬性的交互作用比起未來時間觀較低的人更為明顯。因此，本研究假設一認為主觀工作屬性在遠程未來對求職者的影響較大，而客觀工作屬性在近程未來的影響較大；假設二則認為時間距離與工作屬性在求職意願上的適配效果，對於未來時間觀較高的求職者的影響，會比未來時間觀較低的求職者更為強烈。實驗採2 (正向客觀+負向主觀工作屬性vs. 正向主觀+負向客觀工作屬性) × 2 (近期未來 vs. 遠期未來) 多因子實驗設計，將受試者隨機分配至各情境，測量其未來時間觀程度，以及其求職意願、工作與組織吸引力、接受聘僱意願。結果顯示時間距離與工作屬性對求職者的求職意願、工作與組織吸引力具交互作用，但此交互作用效果與研究假設一相反，客觀工作屬性在遠程未來的影響較大，而主觀工作屬性在近程未來影響較大；另一方面，對於未來時間觀較高的求職者來說，時間距離與工作屬性的交互作用效果，比起未來時間觀較低的求職者更為強烈，與本研究假設二相符。

While the construal level theory (CLT) has been widely discussed in the consumer behavior domain, this study is aimed to extend the CLT to the recruitment research, in wish to realize whether people’s preference and attitudes toward the different job attributes change in different temporal distances. The study also discusses whether future time perspective (FTP) moderates the interaction effect of temporal distance and job attributes. The study applies a 2 (near future vs. distant future) × 2 (positive objective + negative subjective job attributes vs. positive subjective + negative objective job attributes) between-subjects factorial experiment design. The result shows that the objective job attributes have a stronger influence on peoples’ job pursuit intention and job/organization attraction in the distant future rather than in the near future; whereas subjective job attributes have a stronger influence in the near future rather than in the distant future, which are in contrast to the hypothesis 1 of this study. In addition, the study finds out that the interaction effect of temporal distance and job attributes is stronger for the people with higher FTP rather than the people with lower FTP, which is aligned with the hypothesis 2.

論文審定書 i
致謝辭 ii
摘要 iii
Abstract iv
目錄 v
表目錄 vii
圖目錄 viii
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 3
第二章 文獻回顧 4
第一節 工作選擇理論 4
第二節 解釋水平理論 7
第三節 解釋水平理論與工作選擇理論 10
第四節 未來時間觀 12
第五節 研究架構圖 14
第三章 研究方法 15
第一節 研究參與者 15
第二節 實驗設計 15
第三節 問卷設計 16
第四章 研究結果 20
第一節 操弄檢定 20
第二節 假設檢定 21
第五章 討論與結論 31
第一節 研究摘述 31
第二節 研究結果討論 32
第三節 學術意涵 34
第四節 管理意涵 35
第五節 研究限制與未來建議 36
參考文獻 38
附錄 44

一、 中文部分
周軒逸、練乃華 (2010)。時間距離對負面競選廣告效果之影響。臺灣民主季刊， 7(2)，33-76。
林姿葶、鄭伯壎 (2014)。鑑往知來：領導研究中的時間議題。中華心理學刊，56(2)，237-255。
勞動部勞動力發展署 (2015)。2015大專畢業生新鮮人工作觀大調查。擷取自 http://www.taiwanjobs.gov.tw/Internet/2015/Survey/Q2_1/page01.html.
二、 英文部分
Aiman-Smith, L., Bauer, T. N., & Cable, D. M. (2001). Are you attracted? Do you intend to pursue? A recruiting policy-capturing study. Journal of Business and psychology, 16(2), 219-237.
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann. (Eds.) Action control (pp. 11-39). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179-211.
Appiah-Padi, R. (2014). Job Desirability. SAGE Open, 4(3), 2158244014551711.
Balliet, D., & Ferris, D. L. (2013). Ostracism and prosocial behavior: A social dilemma perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,120(2), 298-308.
Barber, A. E., Daly, C. L., Giannantonio, C. M., & Phillips, J. M. (1994). Job search activities: An examination of changes over time. Personnel Psychology,47(4), 739- 766.
Behling, O., Labovitz, G., & Gainer, M. (1968). College recruiting: A theoretical base. Personnel Journal, 47, 13-19.

Bluedorn, A. C., & Martin, G. (2008). The time frames of entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(1), 1-20.
Chapman, D. S., Uggerslev, K. L., Carroll, S. A., Piasentin, K. A., & Jones, D. A. (2005). Applicant attraction to organizations and job choice: a meta-analytic review of the correlates of recruiting outcomes. Journal of applied psychology, 90(5), 928-944.
Cojuharenco, I., Patient, D., & Bashshur, M. R. (2011). Seeing the “forest” or the “trees” of organizational justice: Effects of temporal perspective on employee concerns about unfair treatment at work. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116(1), 17-31.
Dhar, R., & Kim, E. Y. (2007). Seeing the forest or the trees: Implications of construal level theory for consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology,17(2), 96-100.
Ellis, R. A., & Taylor, M. S. (1983). Role of self-esteem within the job search process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 632-640.
Epel, E. S., Bandura, A., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1999). Escaping Homelessness: The Influences of Self‐Efficacy and Time Perspective on Coping With Homelessness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(3), 575-596.
Fiedler, K. (2007). Construal level theory as an integrative framework for behavioral decision-making research and consumer psychology. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 101-106.
Freitas, A. L., Salovey, P., & Liberman, N. (2001). Abstract and concrete self-evaluative goals. Journal of personality and social psychology, 80(3), 410-424.
Fujita, K., Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Levin-Sagi, M. (2006). Construal levels and self- control. Journal of personality and social psychology, 90(3), 351-367.
Gellerman, S. (1964). Motivation and productivity. New York: American Management Association.

Harber, K. D., Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (2003). Participant self-selection biases as a function of individual differences in time perspective. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25(3), 255-264.
Husman, J., & Shell, D. F. (2008). Beliefs and perceptions about the future: A measurement of future time perspective. Learning and Individual Differences,18(2), 166-175.
Kardes, F. R., Cronley, M. L., & Kim, J. (2006). Construal-level effects on preference stability, preference-behavior correspondence, and the suppression of competing brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(2), 135-144.
Kardes, F. R., Cronley, M. L., & Kim, J. (2006). Construal-level effects on preference stability, preference-behavior correspondence, and the suppression of competing brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(2), 135-144.
Kim, H., Rao, A. R., & Lee, A. Y. (2009). It's time to vote: The effect of matching message orientation and temporal frame on political persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(6), 877-889.
Kray, L. J. (2000). Contingent weighting in self-other decision making. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 83(1), 82-106.
Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2008). The psychology of transcending the here and now. Science, 322(5905), 1201-1205.
Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Wakslak, C. (2007). Construal level theory and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 113-117.
Liviatan, I., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2008). Interpersonal similarity as a social distance dimension: Implications for perception of others’ actions. Journal of experimental social psychology, 44(5), 1256-1269.
MacCallum, R. C., Zhang, S., Preacher, K. J., & Rucker, D. D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological methods, 7(1), 19-40.
Maglio, S. J., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2013). Distance from a distance: Psychological distance reduces sensitivity to any further psychological distance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(3), 644-657.
Maglio, S. J., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2015). From Time Perspective to Psychological Distance (and Back). In M. Stolarski, N. Fieulaine, & W. V. Beek. (Eds.), Time Perspective Theory; Review, Research and Application (pp. 143-154). Springer International Publishing.
Malka, A., & Covington, M. V. (2005). Perceiving school performance as instrumental to future goal attainment: Effects on graded performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(1), 60-80.
Martin, B. A., Gnoth, J., & Strong, C. (2009). Temporal construal in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 38(3), 5-20.
Okhuysen, G. A., Galinsky, A. D., & Uptigrove, T. A. (2003). Saving the worst for last: The effect of time horizon on the efficiency of negotiating benefits and burdens. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 91(2), 269- 279.
Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1998). Matching versus mismatching attitude functions: Implications for scrutiny of persuasive messages. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(3), 227-240.
Pounder, D. G., & Merrill, R. J. (2001). Job desirability of the high school principalship: A job choice theory perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(1), 27-57.
Pounder, D. G., & Young, I. P. (1996). Recruitment and selection of educational administrators: Priorities for today’s schools. In K. A. Leithwood, J. D. Chapman, P. Corson, P. Hallinger, & A. Hart. (Eds.), International handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 279-308). Springer Netherlands.
Pounder, D. G., Crow, G. M., & Bergerson, A. A. (2004). Job desirability of the university professorate in the field of educational leadership. Journal of School leadership, 14(3), 497-529.
Schwab, D. P., Rynes, S. L., & Aldag, R. J. (1987). Theories and research on job search and choice. Research in personnel and human resources management, 5(1), 129-166.
Shell, D. F., & Husman, J. (2001). The multivariate dimensionality of personal control and future time perspective beliefs in achievement and self-regulation. Contemporary educational psychology, 26(4), 481-506.
Shipp, A. J., Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2009). Conceptualization and measurement of temporal focus: The subjective experience of the past, present, and future. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 110(1), 1-22.
Simons, J., Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Lacante, M. (2004). Placing motivation and future time perspective theory in a temporal perspective.Educational Psychology Review, 16(2), 121-139.
Stephan, E., Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2010). Politeness and psychological distance: a construal level perspective. Journal of personality and social psychology, 98(2), 268-280.
Todorov, A., Goren, A., & Trope, Y. (2007). Probability as a psychological distance: Construal and preferences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(3), 473- 482.
Tom, V. R. (1971). The role of personality and organizational images in the recruiting process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 6(5), 573-592.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2000). Temporal construal and time-dependent changes in preference. Journal of personality and social psychology, 79(6), 876-889.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2003). Temporal construal. Psychological review,110(3), 403-421.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological review, 117(2), 440-463.
Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Wakslak, C. (2007). Construal levels and psychological distance: Effects on representation, prediction, evaluation, and behavior. Journal of consumer psychology: the official journal of the Society for Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 83-95.
Tumasjan, A., Welpe, I., & Spörrle, M. (2013). Easy now, desirable later: the moderating role of temporal distance in opportunity evaluation and exploitation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(4), 859-888.
White, K., MacDonnell, R., & Dahl, D. W. (2011). It's the mind-set that matters: The role of construal level and message framing in influencing consumer efficacy and conservation behaviors. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(3), 472-485.
Young, I. P., Rinehart, J. S., & Heneman, H. G. (1993). Effects of job attributes categories, applicant job experience, and recruiter sex on applicant job attractiveness ratings. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 7, 55-66.
Young, I. P., Rinehart, J. S., & Place, W. (1989). Theories for teacher selection: Objective, subjective and critical contact. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5, 329-336.
Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting Time in Perspective: A Valid, Reliable Individual-Differences Metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271-1288.