本研究重點為深入探討家長式領導與部屬反應之間的關係，在領導者展現恩威並濟的領導模式時，是否會產生一種像家長式關係認定的中介機制，進而影響部屬的行為反應。
本研究針對台灣及中國大陸地區共168位不同產業之員工進行研究，結果發現：(一) 恩與威兩者展現程度一致時，會比兩者展現程度不一致時，獲得較高的家長式關係認定；(二) 當恩與威兩者展現程度一致時，家長式關係認定會隨著恩威展現程度的增加而提升；(三) 恩與威兩者展現程度不一致時，恩多威少情況下的家長式關係認定，將高於威多恩少；(四) 透過多項式迴歸分析與反應曲面法的三維圖示呈現，明確地看出當恩威並濟領導行為施展時，在中等程度以上之恩威並濟便可達到尤佳的家長式關係認定，並非要到高度恩威並濟之領導行為才會有明顯的家長式關係認定反應。

The objective of this research is to explore the relationship between paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses. In particular, the research seeks to find out when under the simultaneous demonstration of authority and benevolence in a leadership style, whether paternalistic relationship becomes a mediating mechanism that would affect subordinate responses.
This research was conducted among 168 employees from various industries in Taiwan and China. The purpose of the study are as follows: (1) When the levels of benevolence and authority being demonstrated are equal, the paternalistic relationship is better identified when both of these levels are high as opposed to when both of these levels are lower.(2) The effect is better when the levels of benevolence and authority are demonstrated equally compared to when the levels of benevolence and authority are not demonstrated equally. (3) When the levels of benevolence and authority demonstrated are not equal, having a higher level of benevolence will result in more paternalistic relationship being identified. (4) Through polynominal regression and response surface methodology, the three dimensional map shows that when the levels of benevolence and authority being demonstrated are equal, under the circumstance that the levels being demonstrated are medium or above, good paternalistic relationship will be identified. Furthermore, it is not necessary that high and equal levels of benevolence and authority need to be achieved in order to have apparent paternalistic relationship being identified.

論文審定書 i
摘 要 ii
Abstract iii
目錄 iv
表次 vi
圖次 vii
第一章 研究動機與目的 1
第二章 文獻探討 3
第一節 家長式領導 3
壹、家長式領導 3
貳、威權領導 10
參、仁慈領導 13
肆、家長式領導相關研究 14
伍、小結 16
第二節 家長式領導研究之中介機制及影響效果 18
第三節 家長式關係認定 21
第四節 恩威並濟與家長式關係認定之相關研究 25
第三章 研究方法 28
第一節 樣本及程序 28
第二節 研究工具 29
壹、研究變項的衡量 29
貳、資料分析方法 32
第四章 研究結果 35
第一節 各類變項內之相關分析 35
第二節 多項式迴歸分析及反應曲面法之探討 37
壹、多項式迴歸及反應曲面法之分析程序 37
貳、恩威並濟與家長式關係認定之主要效果 39
第五章 研究討論與建議 42
第一節 重要結果 42
第二節 理論貢獻 43
壹、家長式關係認定量表修正 43
貳、多項式迴歸分析與反應曲面法 44
第三節 實務貢獻 45
第四節 研究限制與未來方向 46
壹、家長式關係認定與結果變項之關係釐清 46
貳、家長式關係認定與情感性的信任或組織中的自尊之研究 46
參、研究對象可擴大為整個華人地區通盤進行研究 46
肆、展現恩威並濟領導行為操作模式及其因果關係有待後續研究 47
參考文獻 48
附錄一 58

中文文獻
于海波、鄭曉明、李永端 (2009)。家長式領導對組織學習的作用。管理學報(北 京)，6(5)，664-670。
王行 (1989)。從Moreno角色理論談心理劇的治療理念。東吳政治與社會學報，13，439-448。
王怡云 (2005)。學校組織中的家長式領導-以一個幼稚園為例。家政教育學報，7，59 。
任金剛、樊景立、鄭伯壎、周麗芳 (2003)。高階主管之家長式領導與組織效能：一項個人與組織層次的分析。教育部華人本土心理學研究追求卓越計畫研究報告，報告編號 89-H-FA01-2-4-4。台北：教育部
何友輝、陳淑娟、趙志裕 (1991)。關係取向：為中國社會心理方法論求答案。見楊國樞、黃光國(主編)：中國人的心理與行為，(49-66頁)。台北：桂冠圖書公司。
吳宗祐 (2008)。主管威權領導與部屬的工作滿意度與組織承諾：信任的中介歷程與情緒智力的調節效果。本土心理學研究，30，3-63。
吳宗祐、徐瑋伶、鄭伯壎 （2002）。怒不可遏或忍氣吞聲？華人企業中主管威權領導行為與部屬憤怒情緒反應的關係。本土心理學研究期刊，18，3-49。
吳敏、黃旭、閻洪、徐玖平 (2007)。領導行為與領導有效性關係的比較研究。軟科學(四川)，21(5)，5-9。
李超平、孟慧、時勘 (2007)。變革型領導，家長式領導，PM理論與領導有效性關係的比較研究。心理科學(上海)，30(6)，1477-1481。
周浩、龍立榮 (2008)。上級家長式領導風格影響下屬組織公正感的機制。中大管理研究(廣東)，3(3)，36-56。
周婉茹 (2009)。專權與威嚴領導的效果：心理賦能的中介與仁慈領導的調節(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台灣大學心理學研究所，台北市。
周婉茹、周麗芳、鄭伯壎、任金剛 (2010)。專權與尚嚴之辨：再探威權領導的內涵與恩威並濟的效果。本土心理學研究，34，223-284。
周麗芳、周婉茹、嚴珮瑜 (2011)。威權領導的前因與後果：主管與部屬間的壓力移轉。第七屆華人心理學家學術研討會，中央研究院，台北。
周麗芳、鄭伯壎、任金剛 (2006)。情境脈絡影響。見鄭伯壎、樊景立、周麗芳(主編)，家長式領導：模式與證據。台北：華泰文化公司。
姜定宇、丁捷、林伶瑾 (2012)。家長式領導與部屬效能：信任主管與不信任主管的中介效果。中華心理期刊，54(3)，269-291。
楊國樞 (1998)。家族化歷程、泛家族主義及組織管理。見鄭伯壎、黃國隆、郭建志(主編)，海峽兩岸之組織與管理，19-59。台北：遠流。
張貴傑、孫丕琳、李文心、陳靜美、陳俊光、林慈玥、曾立芳、梁淑娟、吳月霞、林瑞華 (譯) (2004)。心理劇導論 (原作者：Adam Blatner)。台北：心理。(原著出版年：2000)
許金田、胡秀華、凌孝綦、鄭伯壎、周麗芳 (2004)。家長式領導與組織公民行為的關係：上下關係品質之中介效果。交大管理學報，24，119-149。
陳信翰 (2016)。家長式領導、組織承諾、工作壓力與工作績效關係之研究─以嘉義縣(市)外勤消防人員為例(未出版之碩士論文)。南華大學企業管理研究所，嘉義縣。
陳皓怡、高尚仁、吳治富 (2007)。家長式領導對多國籍部屬身心健康之影響：以華人外派主管為例。應用心理研究(台北)，36，223-244。
陳鏡如 (譯) (2002)。心理劇入門手冊 (主編者：Karp, M., Holmes, P., & Tauvon, K. B. )。台北：心理 ( 原著出版年：1994)
趙安安、高尚仁 (2005)。台灣地區華人企業家長式領導風格與員工壓力之關聯。應用心理研究(台北)，27，111-131。
樊景立、鄭伯壎 (2000)。華人組織的家長式領導：一項文化觀點的分析。本土心理學研究，13，126-180。
鄭伯壎 (1990)。領導與情境：互動心理學研究途徑，台北：大洋出版社。
鄭伯壎 (1995a)。家長權威與領導行為之關係：一個台灣民營企業主持人的個案研究。中央研究院民族學研究所集刊，79，119-173。
鄭伯壎 (1995b)。差序格局與華人組織行為。本土心理學研究，3，142-219。
鄭伯壎 (2000)。華人企業組織中的領導：一項文化價值的分析，中山管理評論，8(4)，583-617。
鄭伯壎 (2005)。華人領導：理論與實際。台北：桂冠圖書公司。
鄭伯壎、任金剛、周麗芳 (2004)。家長式領導：現代轉化及其影響機制。見國立台灣大學心理學系(主編)，教育部華人本土心理學研究追求卓越計畫研究報告。台北：台灣大學心理學系。
鄭伯壎、周麗芳 (2005)。家長式領導三元模式：現代轉化及其影響機制─威權領導：法家概念的現代轉化。報告編號NSC 94-2413-H-002-003-PAE。台北：行政院國家科學委員會
鄭伯壎、周麗芳、黃敏萍、樊景立、彭泗清 (2003)。家長式領導的三元模式：中國大陸企業組織的證據，本土心理學研究(台北)，20，209-250。
鄭伯壎、周麗芳、樊景立(2000)。家長式領導量表：三源模式的建構與測量，本土心理學研究期刊，14，3-64。
鄭伯壎、樊景立 (2000)。華人組織的家長式領導：一項文化觀點的分析。本土心理學研究，13，127-180。
鄭伯壎、黃敏萍 (2000)。華人企業組織中的領導：一種文化價值的分析。中山管理評論，8(4)，583-617。
鄭伯壎、黃敏萍、周麗芳 (2002)。家長式領導及其效能：華人企業團隊的證據。香港華人心理學報(香港)，3(1)，85-112。
賴志超、林純安、黃國隆 (2006)。組織認定的優勢。見鄭伯壎、姜定宇(主編)，華人組織行為：議題、作法及出版，324-365。台北：華泰。
謝婉柔 (2014)。恩威並濟的家長式領導:機制探討與模式修正(未出版之碩士論文)。中原大學心理學研究所，桃園。
饒一鳴（2011）。軍事機關家長式領導與組織公民行為關係之研究－以中山科學研究院系統製造中心為例(未出版之碩士論文)。世新大學，台北。
龔雅婷（2008）。家長式領導、組織文化、組織承諾、工作壓力與組織績效影響(未出版之碩士論文)，南華大學企業管理系管理科學，嘉義縣。

英文文獻
Ayree, S., Chen, Z.X., & Debrah, Y. A. (2007). Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: Test of a trick-down model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 191-201.
Baldwin, M. W. (1992). Relational schemas and the processing of social information.Psychological Bulletin,112(3), 461-484.
Baldwin, M. W., S. E. Carrell, and D. F. Lopez(1990). My advisor and pope are watching me from the back of my mind. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 435-454.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership. Theory, research and managerial application. New York; Free Press.
Caliskan, S. C. (2010). The interaction between paternalistic leadership style,organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior: A study from Turkey. China-USA Business Review, 9(10), 67-80.
Callero, P. L., Howard, J. A., & Piliavin, J. A. (1987). Helping behavior as role behavior: Disclosing social structure and history in the analysis of pro-social action.Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 247-256.
Callero, P. L. (1991). Conclusion: Conceptions of society in theories of self and social cognition. In J. A. Howard & P. L. Callero (Eds.), The self-society dynamic: Cognition,emotion and action (pp. 323-331). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Chang, C. H., & Johnson, R. E. (2010). Not all leader-member exchanges are created equal: Importance of leader relational identity. Leadership Quarterly, 21(5), 796-808. DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.07.008
Chan, S. C. H., Huang, X.,Snape, E., & Lam, C. K. (2012). The Janus face of patemalistic leaders: Authoriarianism, benevolence, subordinates’organization-based self-esteem, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 34, 108-124.
Chen, C. C., & Farth, J.L. (樊景立) (2008, June). Developments in understanding Chinese leadership: Pateralism and its elaborations, moderations and alternative, Paper presented at the 2008 international Association for Chinese Management Research (IACMR) Biannual Conference, Guangchou, China.
Chen, H. Y., & Kao, H. S. R. (2009). Chinese paternalistic leadership and non-Chinese subordinates' psychological health. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(12).2533-2546.
Chen, T. T. (2011). Structuring versus autocaticness;Exploring a comprehensive model of authoritarian leadership. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, City University of Hong Kong.
Cheng, B. S. (鄭伯壎), Chou, L.F. (周麗芳), Huang, M. P. (黃敏萍), Wu, T. Y.(吳宗祐), & Farth, J. L.(樊景立) (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology. 7(1), 89-117.
Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Huang, M. P., Wu, T.Y., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7(1), 89-117.
Chou, L. F., & Cheng, B. S. (2007). Does globalization matter? The Change of power distance and its effects on authoritative leadership in business and military organizations in Taiwan. Paper presented at the International conference on Globalization and Development in Chinese Economic Region, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chou, L. F., Cheng,B. S., & Farh, J.L. (2006). Does employee’s authouritarian values matter: The effectiveness of people-related and task-related authoritarian leadership in China and Taiwan’s private business. Paper presented at the 2006 International Association for Chinese Management Research (IACMR) Biannual Conference, Nanjing, China.
Chou, W. J., Chou, L. F., & Cheng, B. S. (2010,August).Authoritarian leadership and subordinate well-being:How and when does leadership function? Paper presented at the Academy of Management 2010 Annual Meeting. Montreal, CA.
Chou, L. F., Cheng, B. S.(2007). Does globalization matter? The change of power distance and its effects on authoritative leadership in business and military organizations in Taiwan.International Conference on Globalization and Development in Chinese Economic Region,Taipei, Taiwan:
Dayton, T. (2005). The use of psychodrama in dealing with grief and addiction-Related loss and trauma. Journal of Group Psychotherapy, Psychodrama and Sociomertry, 58(1), 15-34
De Cremer, D. (2006). Affective and motivational consequences of leader self-sacrifice; The moderating effect of autocratic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 79-93.
Deyo, F. C. (1978). Local foremen in multinational enterprises: A comparative case study of supervisory role-tensions in Western and Chinese factories od Singapore.Journal of Management Studies,15,308-317.
Deyo, F. C. (1983). Chinese management practices and work commitment in comparative perspective. In L. A. P. Gosling & L. Y. C. Lim (Eds.), The Chinese in Southeast Asia: Identity,culture and politics (Vol. 1,pp. 215-230). Singapore: Maruzen Asia.
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611-628.
Erison,E. H. (1964). Insight and responsibility. New York, NY:Norton.
Farh, J.L. (樊景立), & Cheng, B. S. (鄭伯壎) (2000). A Cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. In J.T. Li., A.S. Tsui, & E. Weldon (Eds.), Management and organizations in the Chinese context. London: Macmillan.
Farh, J. L. (樊景立), Liang, J., Chou, L. F. (周麗芳), & Cheng, B. S. (鄭伯壎) 2008. Paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations: Research progress and future research
Farh, J. L., Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., & Chu, X. P. (2006). Authority and benevolence:Employees’ responses to paternalistic leadership in China. In A. S. Tsui, Y. Bian, & L. Cheng (Eds.), China’s domestic private firms: Multidisciplinary perspectives on management and performance (pp.230-260). New York: Sharpe.
Farh, J. L. & Cheng, B. S. (2000). A Cultural Analysis of Paternalistic Leadership in Chinese Organizations: In J. T. Li., Tsui, A. S., & E. Weldon(Eds.) Management And Organizations in the Chinese Context, London: Macmillan.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1984). Social cognition (1st ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fitness, J., & Fletcher, G. J. O. (1993). Love, hate, anger, and jealousy in close relationships: A prototype and cognitive appraisal analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 942-958.
Flynn,F. J. (2005). Identity orientations and forms of social exchange in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 30, 737-750.
Foels, R., Driskell, J. E., Mullen, B., & Salas, E. (2000). The effects of democratic leadership on group member satisfaction: integration. Small Group Research, 31, 676-701. doi:10.1177/104649640003100603
Gist, M. E., & Mitchell, T. R. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. Academy of management Review, 17(2), 183-211.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York, NY: Doubleday Anchor Books.
Gong, Y., Luo, Y., & Jing, R. (2012). Enabling cross-functional teams: The role of patermalistic leadership in Chinese context. International Review of Business and Social Sciences, 1(5). 26-46.
Graen, G.B., Novak, M., & Sommerkamp, P. (1982). The effects of leader-member exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30, 109-131.
Hinde, R. A. (1997). Relationships: A dialectical perspective. East Sussex. UK:Psychology Press.
Louiselle, K. G. (1990). Job involvement as psychological identification with job roles: The refinement and validation of a construct (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri, Columbia, MO.
McCall, G. J., & Simmons, J. L. (1978). Identities and interactions.New York, NY:Free press.
Peterson PE, et al. (1997) Crystallization and characterization of bovine liver glutamate dehydrogenase. J Struct Biol 120(1):73-7
Planalp, S. (1987). Interplay between relational knowledge and events. InR. Burnett, P. McGhee, & D. D. Clarke(Eds.), Accounting for relationships. 175-191.
Podsakoff, P. M., Mackebzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on follows'trust in leader,satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1(2),107-142.
Pye, L. W. (1985). Asia power and politics:The cultural dimensions of authority. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Redding, S. G.(1990). The Spirit of Chinese Capitalism. New York: Walterde Gruyter.
Silin, R. H. (1976). Leadership and value : The organization of large-scale Taiwan enterprises. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sluss, D. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2007). Relational identity and identification: Defining ourselves through work relationships. Academy of Management Review, 32, 9-32.
Turner, J. C. (1982). Toward a cognitive redefinition of the social group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and intergroup relations (pp.15-40). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Wang, A. C., & Cheng B. S. (2010). When does benevolent leadership lead to creativity ? The moderating role of creative role identity and job autonomy. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(1), 106-121
Westwood, R. I. & Chan, A.(1992). Headship and Leadership, In R. I. Westwood (Ed.), Organizational Behaviour ： A Southeast Asian Perspective, Hong Kong: Longman Group
Westwood, R. I. (1997). Harmony and patriarchy: Then cultural basis for paternalistic headship’ among the overseas Chinese. Organization Studies, 18, 445-480.
Wu, M. (2012). Moral leadership and work performance: Testing the mediating and interaction effects in China. Chinese Management Studies, 6(2), 284-299.
Wu, M., Huang, X.,& Chan, S. C. H.(2012). The influencing mechanisms of paternalistic leadership in Mainland China. Asia Pacific Business Review, 18(4).
Wu,M. & Xu,E. (2012). Paternalistic leadership:From here to where? In X. Huang & M. H. Bond (Eds.), Handbook od Chinese organizational behavior: Integrating theory,research and practice (pp. 449-466). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Yukl, G. (1998). Leadership in organizations (4th Ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentic-Hall.