上班

回到馬來西亞，我在一家正在發展的審計公司上班。目前我的工作就是跟公司上下的人「聊天」，很慶幸這份工作跟我的論文很有關係。是的，我的論文完成了，《以參照推論分析探究員工工作經驗中之抱怨現象》，有興趣可以下載閱讀，不會太長，不到一百頁。

聽了那麼多員工的抱怨，我覺得我很慶幸的是雖然我年紀不小，也不算老，但是我能夠有一些別人沒有的東西，而更慶幸的是這些東西可以被分享，參照學習。我不能說我經歷了很多，但是我能夠用自己的經歷去同理別人，並以過來人的方式提供一些意見，要說我倚老賣老也罷，但我會說不是那樣，也慶幸我能開心的樂意的分享。

溝通永遠都是雙方面的，任何感情皆如此，不能投入情感的工作不能稱作是職涯，而只能是一份糊口的活兒，那是悲哀和可惜的，因為人的一生大部分時間花在工作上。傳統的社會並不鼓勵我們說出自己的感覺，就像我們不常把愛掛在嘴邊，但是我覺得這也不是傳不傳統的問題，而是習不習慣的問題，因為有些人的家庭和生活就是能夠常常感受到它的存在。

這個公司讓我待下來的原因絕對不是薪資，而是看見組織文化和氛圍，這裡的土壤是有機的，有潛能的，雖然一定會有挑戰，但是我能感覺很多人在支持這個轉變，支持我，所以我也很開心。我期待有一天我能分享這一段故事。

P/S 給匿名留言者：我不明白你為何要放一坨屎在我的留言。

Rethinking Psychology

Much have been read and discuss on what is psychology. But, if you haven't read this this book, I am SURE that you don't know much about psychology. The book has been introduce to fellow masters in the classroom, though it is not easy to read like those psychology introductory textbook, I find it is far more interesting and insightful. Check the book at Google Books if interested, they have some page previews.

Book overview
In recent years, a range of perspectives across psychology have challenged the experimental, positivist and cognitivist orientation that has dominated the field for so long. This critique of the mainstream has come out of a broad spectrum of theoretical influences, from phenomenology and symbolic interactionism to cultural and feminist approaches, and also takes in the new emphasis on discourse.

Rethinking Psychology overviews these developments. The outstanding international contributors have produced a coherent and wide-ranging guide to the key strands of theory, showing how they feed into the debate about the creation of a new psychology.

Facebook: Facts You Probably Didn't Know

Psychologist identified Facebook Addiction Disorder? Is that true? Well, you better know the truth: psychologist has Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder on labeling everyone into the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders(DSM). (See here and here)

Obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) is a mental disorder characterized by intrusive thoughts that produce anxiety, by repetitive behaviors aimed at reducing anxiety, or by a combination of such thoughts (obsessions) and behaviors (compulsions). The symptoms of this anxiety disorder may include repetitive hand-washing; extensive hoarding; preoccupation with sexual or aggressive impulses, or with particular religious beliefs; aversion to odd numbers; and nervous habits, such as opening a door and closing it a certain number of times before one enters or leaves a room. These symptoms can be alienating and time-consuming, and often cause severe emotional and economic loss. The acts of those who have OCD may appear paranoid and come across to others as psychotic. However, OCD sufferers generally recognize their thoughts and subsequent actions as irrational, and they may become further distressed by this realization.

[Source: Online PhD Programs for MashableMashable.com]

BIG FIVE Personality Test

大五人格測驗(Goldberg,1992)是心理學家廣泛使用的人格測驗。我們都知道買一套人格測驗是很貴的，自己找人做評量也是很貴的。這裡有個好消息！我發現Goldberg等人已經將大五人格測驗做了一個公共財產版(public domain)，大家可以玩玩看，有短版（題數較少）和完整版，對公共財產測驗有興趣的可以看Goldberg(1999)和Goldberg,et al.(2006)。可以列印回饋喔！

The Big Five

In contemporary psychology, the "Big Five" factors of personality are five broad domains or dimensions of personality which have been scientifically discovered to define human personality. First documented by J M Digman in 1990 in his five factor model of personality and later at the highest level of organization (Goldberg, 1993). These five over-arching domains have been found to contain and subsume more-or-less all known personality traits within their five domains and to represent the basic structure behind all personality traits. They have brought order to the often-bewildering array of specific lower-level personality concepts that are constantly being proposed by psychologists, which are often found to be overlapping and confusing. These five factors provide a rich conceptual framework for integrating all the research findings and theory in personality psychology. The big five traits are also referred to as the "Five Factor Model" or FFM (Costa & McCrae, 1992), and as the Global Factors of personality (Russell & Karol, 1994).

The Big Five model is considered to be one of the most comprehensive, empirical, data-driven research findings in the history of personality psychology. Identifying the traits and structure of human personality has been one of the most fundamental goals in all of psychology. Over three or four decades of research, these five broad factors were gradually discovered and defined by several independent sets of researchers (Digman, 1990). These researchers began by studying all known personality traits and then factor-analyzing hundreds of measures of these traits (in self-report and questionnaire data, peer ratings, and objective measures from experimental settings) in order to find the basic, underlying factors of personality.

At least three sets of researchers have worked independently for decades on this problem and have identified generally the same Big Five factors: Goldberg at the Oregon Research Institute, Cattell at the University of Illinois, and Costa and McCrae at the National Institutes of Health.These three sets of researchers used somewhat different methods in finding the five traits, and thus each set of five factors has somewhat different names and definitions. However, all three sets have been found to be highly inter-correlated and factor-analytically aligned.

It is important to note that these traits have been found to organize personality at the highest level, and so they are most helpful as a conceptual, organizing framework for regular, lower-level personality traits. However, because the Big Five traits are so broad and comprehensive, they are not nearly as powerful in predicting and explaining actual behavior as are the more numerous lower-level traits. Many studies have confirmed that in predicting actual behavior the more numerous facet or primary level traits are far more effective (e.g. Mershon & Gorsuch, 1988; Paunonon & Ashton, 2001)

The Big five factors are Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism (OCEAN, or CANOE if rearranged). The Neuroticism factor is sometimes referred to as Emotional Stability. Some disagreement remains about how to interpret the Openness factor, which is sometimes called "Intellect". Each factor consists of a cluster of more specific traits that correlate together. For example, extraversion includes such related qualities as sociability, excitement seeking, impulsiveness, and positive emotions.

The Five Factor Model is a purely descriptive model of personality, but psychologists have developed a number of theories to account for the Big Five.

http://ipip.ori.org/
Short Form for the IPIP-NEO (短版)
The IPIP-NEO - Full Version (完整版)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

Creativity, Fulfillment and Flow

It happened to be I just need to tidy up my files in my Download Folder, I found this piece of video, which is good to share. After having a look at the wikipedia site, I find it interesting in this "FLOW" theory, especially when I try to implied it into the role of workers or so called employee, including managers' experience. And yes, he does talk about work as well. Enjoy.

For those who wanna know more about optimal experience in work and leisure, article written by Csíkszentmihályi, can be reach by the link provided.

Abstract
Followed 78 adult workers for 1 week with the experience sampling method. (This method randomly samples self-reports throughout the day). The main question was whether the quality of experience was more influenced by whether a person was at work or at leisure or more influenced by whether a person was in flow (i.e., in a condition of high challenges and skills). Results showed that all the variables measuring the quality of experience, except for relaxation and motivation, are more affected by flow than by whether the respondent is working or in leisure. Moreover, the great majority of flow experiences are reported when working, not when in leisure. Regardless of the quality of experience, however, respondents are more motivated in leisure than in work. But individuals more motivated in flow than in apathy reported more positive experiences in work. Results suggest implications for improving the quality of everyday life. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved)

Csíkszentmihályi suggests several ways in which a group could work together so that each individual member could achieve flow. The characteristics of such a group include:

• Creative spatial arrangements: Chairs, pin walls, charts, but no tables; thus work primarily standing and moving.
• Playground design: Charts for information inputs, flow graphs, project summary, craziness (here also craziness has a place), safe place (here all may say what is otherwise only thought), result wall, open topics
• Parallel, organized working
• Target group focus
• Advancement of existing one (prototyping)
• Increase in efficiency through visualization
• Existence of differences among participants represents an opportunity, rather than an obstacle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow psychology
http://www.ted.com/talks/mihaly_csikszentmihalyi_on_flow.html
http://www.psychologie.uzh.ch...pdf

從學術和實務的分裂到上研究所的衝擊

動機

Cascio (2008)這一篇文章是和同學們在圖書館，教大家用資料庫的時候意外發現的，但我立刻就知道那就是我要看的文章，毫無考慮的開始念起來。看完Cascio這一篇後，就開始追作者提到的一些相關研究，於是找到了Rynes et al. (2007)和Deadrick and Gibson (2007)兩篇。我之所以選這樣的文章來看，動機不外乎我對學術和實務的分裂有興趣作更深入了解，這或許和當初看《應用心理研究》33期中《組織臨床研究》受到的啟蒙和上高等組織看Dunnette (1990)等文章有關。另一方面，我想試著去理解當初看見這篇文章時，對於自己被這個「分裂」吸引的理由，用上研究所的經驗與文本作對話，進行更深的反思，希望能對自身的困惑找到答案。

\

反思

這三篇文章其實不難看出都用了相同的方──內容分析。的確，這三篇是有關聯的，這個關聯由Rynes, S.L., Colbert, A.E., & Brown, K.G. (2002)的發現開始，在2007年時將他們的研究擴大範圍，針對實務為主的期刊所發表的文章進行內容分析(Rynes et al., 2007)。同年，Deadrick D.L., Gibson P.A.(2007)引用了Rynes et al. (2002)的發現，針對HR學術為主和實務為主的期刊進行了比較。今年，Cascio(2008)也引用了以上的文獻進行了更大範圍的內容分析，將社會人力資本的趨勢也納進來，檢視I/O心理學的發展，並對學界發出呼籲拉近學術和實務的落差。

這三篇內容分析讓我們更具體的看見學術和實務的鴻溝，甚至是與社會的脫節。但是這個方法有其限制，三篇的作者都分別提出來了，這裡就不贅述。但有一點要特別提醒的是，這些數據只是在分析「學術與實務在期刊上文章類型的差異」。對於為何有此差異，著墨甚少。Rynes(2007)提出這可能是訊息沒有辦法完整、正確和順利的從學術界傳到實務界的，因此結尾時，提出了期望期刊能改變刊載習慣的建議並鼓勵學術界投稿實務界期刊。但是，對於為何會「訊息沒有辦法完整、正確和順利傳達」並沒有多作追究。

在提出如何拉近這樣的落差的部分，三篇文章作者都提出了非常具體及具有參考價值的作法，這裡我就不多贅述了。但是值得一提的是，Deadrick和Gibson　(2007)在結尾時這麼寫到：「我們都知道學術－研究鴻溝的存在，但我們似乎並沒有真的想要做甚麼去更加理解和來近這樣的落差。那才是我們真正的挑戰。」

這次的閱讀，其實時間上還不允許我去接觸更多的文獻，但我越來越其清楚自己想要唸的知識是甚麼樣的類型，目前我只能說我更確認我的意願是要往行動研究的方向去的。這樣的信念不單只是因為讀了幾篇文章就讓我有這麼樣的衝動，而是在面對研究所（心理學專題）和大學部（老夏家庭關係與個人發展）的課時發現自己對某一種類的知識有特別的偏好，大概會開始發現自己比較會花時間（包括有空或沒空時時）在閱讀比較合口味的文章。雖然目前仍然模糊，說不清楚哪個學派哪種想法。雖然我知道這樣偏食不好，但是目前仍然沒有排斥的情況發生。

另外，我發覺最近對於I/O心理學的歷史脈絡非常感興趣，目前計畫是想要把唸到的人物和其發表的理論化在時間週上，再補上當時社會的脈動，這樣一來有助於理解其理論時空背景。

寫到這裡為止，我已經將第一個動機說清楚了，也將三篇文章重點式摘要了，接下來應該往下去理解我更深層的動機。這的階段，我仍然沒有辦法好好的去整理出一個頭緒來。我想我只能就目前狀態以自己上研究所發生的一些事回應學術和實務的分裂。或許我行動中的知識本身就能讓我更理解此分裂的理由。

研究生生活剛開始，我就接了一個研究計畫，常常邊做邊想，我所做的這些到的能有甚麼用處。光只是翻譯的部分，就開始於到了問題。我到底要怎麼翻譯才是「正確」的？我發覺，若理論概念邏輯清楚，則有幫助於將理論轉化為可操作的活動，但並不一定可行的，更多時候，似乎需要更多的創意與巧思幫忙才行。不僅如此，出了心理學的知識，很常是需要不同的知識背景輔助我們理解或將概念轉化為具體的東西。或許Knowing and Doing需要的是不同的思考邏輯？我不想要太快的跳到說那是他們的興趣不同，因為對我而言，興趣背後可能就有動機（或其他）不同的問題。雖然這是用common sense去想，不一定是因果(causes)但它最起碼可能是個理由(reason)。

我接研究案，目的可能是earn a living，但研究案不是每個研究案我都會想要接，所以對我而言它又有用另外的意義live a life。同理，假設用earn a living去思考學術和實務的分歧，或許就容易想像多了，大家都是為生活打拼，互不相干，因為各自有不同要達到的目標。而把拉近學術和實務的鴻溝視為不需要earn a living或not meaningful enough/at all，那麼這件事勢必被我們忽視。

或許，學術和實務都有各自的遊戲要進行。

閱讀全文

The Psychology of Menu Selection

The Psychology of Menu Selection: Designing Cognitive Control at the Human/Computer Interface
by Kent L. Norman
published by Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1991, 368 pages (ISBN: 0-89391-553-X).

About the Book
Menu selection is emerging as an important mode of human/computer interaction. This book, the first entirely devoted to this important form of human/computer interaction, provides detailed theoretical and empirical information of interest to software designers and human/computer interaction specialists and researchers. A new theoretical approach to menu selection is taken by developing a psychological theory of cognitive control by the user. A comprehensive review of empirical research on menu selection is presented in an organized fashion to aid in the design and evaluation of systems. Finally, information is given on how to protype and evaluate menu selection systems using both performance data and user ratings.

The volume has three parts. Part One is conceptual and theoretical in nature. The first chapter introduces the issues of design and flow of control at the human/computer interface. In the next three chapters taxonomic frameworks are proposed concerning the type of menu selection system being used, the nature of the task being performed by the user, and the cognitive elements involved in performing the task. In Part Two, experimental research on menu selection stemming from paradigms developed in experimental psychology and more recently human factors and cognitive psychology is discussed. The last part of the book deals with the topic of implementation and evaluation. Chapters discuss principles of when and how to use menus, cover topics of prototyping and evaluation, and attempt to plot some of the future directions of menu selection. Throughout, graphs and illustrations are included. Examples of good and bad designs are shown in a number of illustrations while empirical data from experiments are desplayed in graphs.

The reader will benefit from the discussion of the many issues, design possibilities and insights regarding menu slection. The empirical research at times supports and at other times refutes existing guidelines. The reader will want to know what the current state of knowledge is about how to design menuy selections and why the design choices are important.

The On-Line Copy

The complete table of contents is listed below. You may have a peek at the book by clicking on the chapter titles. You may use this resource freely; however, I would prefer that you actually buy a copy to help defray publishing costs. Also, I should point out that the on-line copy is from a pre-publication draft and has not been carefully proof read for errors.

POMS Home Page
Click here for more online books from The UX Bookmark

A Survey of Worker's Complaint

I recently launch a survey at Facebook. This is a major interest in my study which is less discuss by fellow psychologist yet a common enough phenomenon in work environment. Please take 3 minutes to complete the survey for me. I appreciate your participation. Please pass the survey around to your working friends and colleague. Thank you.

Never ending complaints about your job? I am doing a personal study on workers complaint and I need your help to complete this survey. This survey is not funded by any organization, your complaints and data won't goes to any third-party(s). Thank you for taking part.

Click here to complete the survey

H1N1 & psychology

旅行回來了。這次從台北到吉隆坡，再從吉隆坡到新加坡，再有新加坡回到吉隆坡，我總共經過了6次的出入境，測了很多次體溫，但是比沒有耽誤上下飛機的時間。他們用的是紅外線體溫測量機，也就是一台可以看得見鏡頭前物體的體溫的攝影機，效率提高很多。只要遊客經過這台攝影機，就能感應到體溫，如果體溫偏高，才會叫你到一旁去再用體溫槍測一次。

他們的作法都是在入境處建立動線引導，把所有的人引導到一個走道，通往海關，就這樣順著遊客原本的動線去加設一個體溫區，不會帶來甚麼麻煩。通過體溫區的時候，他們也會另外發給你一張有關H1N1的小紙提醒你一下。作業上，我都很滿意這樣的做法，沒有好挑剔的，只是這些小紙有些會被旅客亂丟，有點浪費資源，有礙機場整潔。

另外，入境馬來西亞和新加坡的時候，遊客也必須填寫一份聲明，說明自己是否在一個星期內有到過疫區國家。國海關的時候，需要檢查，算是另一道防護網。

回到旅行之前的焦慮問題，我覺得可以加強的地方可能是在機場登機前，可以做廣播或有告示，請大眾不需要感到太焦慮，不然機場內都是戴口罩的人，會有一種恐怖的感覺。說到戴口罩，我的確是有看到有人戴，但是不多，應該是害怕受感染而戴的，反而有咳嗽的卻沒戴！就這樣，我的觀察報告寫到這裡，很無聊吧。

H1N1

No Rationale for Travel Restrictions – WHO, ICAO
AirAsia wishes to advise guests that the health authorities have started screening passengers from countries affected by the Influenza A (H1N1). We appreciate your cooperation and patience as you might be experiencing delays due to the screening and/or disinfecting procedure.
AirAsia would like to assure guests that we are committed to all regulations and advice from the authorities in countries where we operate to ensure your safety.
To address any concern that you may have, we would like to share the statement below which was issued by the World Health Organisation (WHO):
“Limiting travel and imposing travel restrictions would have very little effect on stopping the virus from spreading, but would be highly disruptive to the global community. … Scientific research based on mathematical modelling indicates that restricting travel will be of limited or no benefit in stopping the spread of disease. Historical records of previous influenza pandemics, as well as experience with SARS, have validated this point.” – WHO (Read the full statement here)
In addition, you may also refer to another statement by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) here.
We will keep you updated with the latest information from time to time, so please do visit this page again to check it out.

最近過了12點就睡不著，實在不知道要幹嘛，傍晚要去跑步又遇到下雨，幾無奈一下，害我什麼都不想做，整個想放空。生活沒有了重心，她覺得我沒有話跟她說，對啊，靜很多。過兩個禮拜，我和她要去玩台灣，從台北玩到花蓮，再去新加坡，所以最近一直在看旅遊資訊，定民宿和火車票等等的。然後最近又跑出來一個H1N1流感，害她很擔心，要我買口罩個她，結果最後發現她要買美美的口罩，是那種騎機車戴的那種 XD 那個不能過濾病毒啦。

然後我也很緊張流感啊，畢竟那麼多人中招，所以就去查查看是不是有規定上飛機要戴口罩，口罩要自己準備嗎？我很不甘願花那種錢 XD 結果發現WHO的聲明，大意是說限制出入境或是管制對疫情的抑制是毫無作用且會帶來嚴重的不方便的，也就是延遲班機，或是如防範SARS/恐怖份子時，一直檢查一直檢查一直檢查一直檢查一直檢查，對乘客而言是很困擾/不自由的。

那麼，雖然有這樣的聲明了，她和大眾一樣還是會心驚驚的啊，怎麼辦呢？從心理學的角度要怎麼解決這樣大家心驚驚的問題呢？答案就留到等我飛去新加坡和馬來西亞的時候想。 聰明的你也可以想想啊 :D

The Ten Most Revealing Psych Experiments

Conformity: Not Believing Your Lying Eyes

From social identity theory psychologists got a handle on group dynamics and prejudices, how natural it is for groups to elicit conformity among their members. In 1951 Solomon Asch set out to identify just how much individual judgment is affected by the group.

In a test environment in which undergrads were asked to render a judgment after other subjects gave deliberately wrong answers, 50% of people gave the same wrong answer when their turn came. Only 25% of test subjects refused to be swayed by the false judgment of the others, while 5% always went with the crowd. The finding was that a third of people will ignore what they know to be true and go with a falsehood if they're in a group that insists on the falsehood being true. What else will people do under influence of the group? Read the rest here ...

brainz.org

Discovering Psychology

Highlighting major new developments in the field, this updated edition of Discovering Psychology offers high school and college students, and teachers of psychology at all levels, an overview of historic and current theories of human behavior. Stanford University professor and author Philip Zimbardo narrates as leading researchers, practitioners, and theorists probe the mysteries of the mind and body. Based on extensive investigation and authoritative scholarship, this introductory course in psychology features demonstrations, classic experiments and simulations, current research, documentary footage, and computer animation. This series is also valuable for teachers seeking to review the subject matter.

Produced by WGBH Boston with the American Psychological Association. 1990, 2001.

Wanna learn psychology without picking up a book? Check out the website for FREE Video-on-Demand(VOD). Request to register for streaming, select "other" on the "state" if you are not US residences. Enjoy!

Discovering Psychology website
Jump start to Chapter 1 VOD without register

認識既熟悉又陌生的信任

認識既熟悉又陌生的信任

這學期是我研究所生活的開始，上課的閱讀和生活周遭的經驗來回，有時讓人開心有時讓人挫折。開心的是課堂上的學習可以讓我更進一步的去思考工作世界發生的種種；挫折的是學習和現實世界的無法連結，其中包括寫我不熟悉的報告文體，往往不知如何下筆而感到懊惱。

《領導心理&社會劇碼》這堂課開在星期四晚上，每次上課都是帶著疲累的身軀去上課，回家的時候卻是疲累的身軀加上滾滾的熱血。每次上課都會讓我對信任有更深的認識，這個認識來自課堂閱讀和討論，沒有像做研究那般的嚴謹，我們都被允許探索「信任」，去說說它不是甚麼的同時，挑戰它是甚麼。從信任我們又談到「角色」與「真我」，用各自的經驗回答一些看似無解，卻有趣的問題：「角色」與「角色」之間有信任嗎？只有「真我」出現的時候才有信任嗎？「角色」與「真我」同時出現的時候，信任又是怎麼一回事等等。我喜歡這樣的討論，因為這樣的討論並沒有太快進入理論的抽象層次，反而是在偶爾七嘴八舌偶爾沉默思考的上課氣氛，我們都是在嘗試著逼近「信任」。可惜，課堂結束時，我們似乎懂了甚麼又不知道懂了些甚麼。

借這次寫《高等組織心理學》期末報告的機會，我想要更進一步的探究信任在組織的研究是如何被定義和進行研究的。於是，我開始找近期有哪些信任的研究，正巧2008年Journal of Applied Psychology (JAP) 第93期就有2篇：Antecedents of Coworker Trust: Leader’s Blessings (Lau & Liden, 2008)和Trust That Binds: The Impact of Collective Felt Trust on Organizational Performance (Salamon & Robinson, 2008)當時，我還沒有決定要用這兩篇寫報告，而是因為看了Lau and Liden (2008)所提到的Direct and Indirect Effects of Third-Party Relationships on Interpersonal Trust (Ferrin, Dirks, & Shah, 2006)。Ferrin et al. (2006) 在文章一開頭提到了一些信任的回顧性文章，即然要知道學術界如何討論信任，我就看了其中的兩篇：The Role of Trust in Organizational Settings (Dirks & Ferrin, 2001)和Trust and Distrust in Organizations: Emerging Perspective, Enduring Questions (Kramer, 1999)。

看完兩篇回顧性的文章後，我大概了解了狀況，也就比較看懂之前在JAP第93期的那兩篇了。因此這份報告，我會大略的介紹三篇文獻，即Lau & Liden (2008)，Salamon & Robinson (2008)和Ferrin, Dirks, & Shah (2006)，再綜合三篇文獻，提出我自己的見解。

閱讀回顧性的文章，信任這個主題，被來自不同的領域的學者研究和定義，這些定義大概可以分為兩大類：（一）信任是一種心理狀態和（二）信任是選擇行為 (Kramer, 1999)。前者將信任視為對於需要依賴的他人的未知動機、意圖和行為，採取一種願意承擔可能會被傷害或冒險的狀態。後者則是將信任視為一種理智的抉擇行為，是大部分的社會學家，經濟學家，政治學家會採用的定義。此定義包含兩個部分，即（一）甲是否對乙有足夠的了解，和（二）信任乙所帶來的好處。

學術上研究信任的文獻大概可分為兩種：（一）信任作為一種主要效果(Main Effect)和（二）信任作為一種調節效果(Moderating Effect) (Dirks & Ferrin, 2001)。主要效果的影響是直接的，譬如：在高度的信任下，我們會預期有正向的工作態度、良好的上司下屬關係、營造出合作性很高的工作氣氛、提升工作效能甚至團體績效等。更具體而言，研究者是將信任視為其他工作行為的預測指標，比如：信任和對團體間溝通的開放性是正相關的，即越高度信任的團體，其團體間的溝通更活絡。而信任作為一種調節效果的研究有別於主要效果，這類研究並不視信任為直接影響工作表現的因素。換句話說，信任是合作行為、高績效或一些正向態度等發生的條件之一而已，比如：之前對主管的信任會調節未達成的諾言和之後對主管的信任。

繼續閱讀全文 Read Full Text

Dan Gilbert: Exploring the frontiers of happiness

Dan Gilbert presents research and data from his exploration of happiness -- sharing some surprising tests and experiments that you can also try on yourself. Harvard psychologist Dan Gilbert says our beliefs about what will make us happy are often wrong -- a premise he supports with intriguing research, and explains in his accessible and (read more...)

Dan Gilbert's homepage
Dan Gilbert's blog

Die Welle

The Wave (original: Die Welle) is a German movie that is based on the experiment The Third Wave. The remake was quite successful in German theatres, and after 10 weeks 2.3 million people watched the film. The director of the film is Dennis Gansel and it starred Jürgen Vogel, Max Riemelt, Jennifer Ulrich, Jacob Matschenz and Frederick Lau.

The Third Wave was an experimental demonstration of nazism movement undertaken by history teacher Ron Jones with sophomore high school students attending his Contemporary History class as part of a study of Nazi Germany. The experiment took place at Cubberley High School in Palo Alto, California, during first week of April 1967. Jones, unable to explain to his students how the German populace could claim ignorance of the extermination of the Jewish people, decided to show them instead. Jones started a movement called "The Third Wave" and convinced his students that the movement is to eliminate democracy.

劉老師在班上介紹同學們看這部片，我已經不記得為甚麼說到這個了，好像是說到組織文化的時候吧，只記得老師之前看完後推薦的。我昨晚看了，你也知道，當然是好看才會介紹的啦。至於有什麼好看呢？從這部片，不管是民主或專制的體系，沒有一種制度是完美的，這好像是廢話，但是重點是它突顯了「魚從來不知道她活在水中，直到被捕起來攤在陽光下的那一刻」。

我們活在民主制度中，即使我們偶爾會因為制度而感到那麼一點點「本來就是這樣啊！」的無奈，但是仔細想想，其實所謂的本來並不存在，本來永遠被未來的人扭曲並稱之為「本來」。覺醒(Awareness)是重要的，它是我們前進的動力。因為覺醒，我們開始走不一樣的路，創造不一樣的未來，但是未來也是虛無的概念，沒有好的未來，沒有壞的未來，沒有未來，只有當下。


http://www.welle.film.de/
wikipedia.org/The_Wave_(2008_film)
wikipedia.org/The_Third_Wave
get the English subtitle here at opensubtitles.org

Three approaches to psychotherapy

Three approaches to psychotherapy. A film series produced by Psychological Films (1975). Gloria, a patient, engaged in therapy with three psychotherapists who have different theories. The film includes descriptions of each theory. Part I features her interview with Carl Rogers a client-centred therapist. Part II features Frederick Perls, a Gestatt therapist. Part III features Albert Ellis, a rational-emotive psychotherapist.

1. Dr. Carl Rogers, founder of Client-centered therapy (48 mins)
2. Dr. Frederick Perls, founder of Gestalt therapy (32mins) / [.flv]
3. Albert Ellis (36mins) / [.flv]

Since part 1 is hard to get through the internet, I have group the full 5 part film in this slides. I have backup the film for personal use as well, please inform me in case the films have been removed. Part 2 & 3 can be view through the internet (click the links above).

I have been discussing with my roommate Jimmy on counseling issues lately as he is heading for Master this year. This give me a chance to look back into my memories. We have watched the films when we were in our 1st year General psychology class. Enjoy if haven't watch it before and I hope you find it interesting on what the Gurus mean by 'psychotherapy' through their practice.


Click here to have a bigger view
wikipedia.org/Carl_Rogers
wikipedia.org/Fritz_Perls
wikipedia.org/Albert_Ellis

Holland 1960-2000 U.S. Data [3/3]

Many might know Holland's famous RIASEC theory of career choice, you might get the information through wikipedia here if you are not sure you still remember it. Here I would like to show you a presentation PPT, i made for my class discussion, to brief a research done by Robert C. Reardon, Emily E. Bullock and Katie E. Meyer. The authors analyze civilian occupations and employment data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau in 1960,1970,1980, 1990, and 2000 with respect to 6 kinds of work (Holland's RIASEC).

Get yourself a RIASEC Personality Test here (180 Questions). [FREE of CHARGE]

A Holland perspective on the U.S. workforce from 1960 to 2000 - FindArticles
Career Development Quarterly, March, 2007, by Robert C. Reardon, Emily E. Bullock, Katie E. Meyer



[21/25]
In 1990, the income for women was lower than the income for men in all six categories, and the discrepancy became greater as income levels rose.

[22/25]
This graph shows that, in 2000, the income for women was lower than the income for men in all categories except Conventional.

[23/25]
This graph shows the number and percentage of men and women over and under the age of 40 years according to the six types of work. We conducted chi-square tests to determine whether there was a relationship in the percentage of persons over and under 40 across the six types. The results indicated that there was no statistically significant relationship between age and kind of work for either men. It shows very little discrepancy between the percentage of male and female workers employed in the various kinds of work with regard to age. For women under 40, 30% are working in Enterprising occupations as opposed to only 26% for the over-40 group. For men under 40, 29% are working in Enterprising occupations as opposed to 33% in the over-40 group. These discrepancies do not suggest large shifts In employment across the six areas with respect to age.

[24/25]
The RECSIA profile for 2000 actual employment (most to fewest jobs) reported by the U.S. Census Bureau (2002) stands in contrast to the SERCIA profile ofthe 20 occupations projected to have
the most new jobs through 2012 by the BLS (Horrigan, 2003-2004). Reardon, Lenz, Sampson, and Peterson (2005) aiso found that the 20 occupations with the fastest projected percentage of employment growth had a profile of SRICEA.

[25/25]
Findings are clear that Enterprising area nearly doubled in employment from 1960 to 2000, from 17% to 30%. The Social area almost doubled in the same period, from 9% to 16%. At the same time, stability, not change.

Male employment has been concentrated in the Realistic and Enterprising areas, and there has been an increase of employment in the Investigative area from 4% to 10% over the 5 decades. There was a corresponding increase for women from 1% to 6% in the Investigative area.
Compared with women, men are more segregated with respect to the six areas of work, with 8 out of 10 working in either the Realistic or Enterprising area. Career guidance programs might encourage men to explore occupations that are frequendy dominated by women.

The End.

Page 1 | 2 | 3

Get yourself a RIASEC Personality Test here (180 Questions). [FREE of CHARGE]

A Holland perspective on the U.S. workforce from 1960 to 2000 - FindArticles
Career Development Quarterly, March, 2007, by Robert C. Reardon, Emily E. Bullock, Katie E. Meyer

wikipedia.org/Holland_Codes

Holland 1960-2000 U.S. Data [2/3]

Many might know Holland's famous RIASEC theory of career choice, you might get the information through wikipedia here if you are not sure you still remember it. Here I would like to show you a presentation PPT, i made for my class discussion, to brief a research done by Robert C. Reardon, Emily E. Bullock and Katie E. Meyer. The authors analyze civilian occupations and employment data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau in 1960,1970,1980, 1990, and 2000 with respect to 6 kinds of work (Holland's RIASEC).

Get yourself a RIASEC Personality Test here (180 Questions). [FREE of CHARGE]

A Holland perspective on the U.S. workforce from 1960 to 2000 - FindArticles
Career Development Quarterly, March, 2007, by Robert C. Reardon, Emily E. Bullock, Katie E. Meyer



[11/25]
R and E are both 30% when it reaches 2000.

[12/25]
Holland (1997) noted several "rules" to use in interpreting the SDS, such as the "Rule of Asymmetrical Distribution of Types and Subtypes." This rule reminds counselors and clients that the distribution of types across the six RIASEC areas is very uneven and unequal. Codes associated with small employment numbers may have fewer jobs and new openings. Our research underscores the validity of this rule.

Career guidance programs might properly help participants understand the economic realities of current employment data, rather than relying exclusively on projections of expected fliture occupational
activity.

[13/25]
As shown in data, more and more women work force are contributing their labor nowadays. The red represents man, while blue is woman.

[14/25]
Most men were employed in the Realistic area, followed by the Enterprising area. Over the 5 decades, between 75% and 85% of male workers were employed in these two areas. This means that only 15% to 25% of men were employed in the other four areas.

[15/25]
As compared with men, women have been employed in more varied kinds of work, including Conventional; Realistic; Social; and, more recently. Enterprising areas. Indeed, the percentage of women employed in the Enterprising area more than doubled over the 5 decades, from 13% to 28%. In contrast, there were slight decreases in female employment in the Conventional and Realistic areas.

[16/25]
The graph shows that male employment in the Realistic area decreased over the 5 decades, whereas the total number and percentage of men and women employed in the Realistic area remained the highest for the six kinds of work (44%).

[17/25]
The percentage of women employed in Realistic occupations decreased from 33% in 1960 to 15% in 2000 in spite of some efforts to encourage nontraditional work for women. The percentage of women in Investigative occupations increased from 1% in 1960 to 6% in 2000. From 1960 to 1990, Conventional was the area of work in which most women were employed, but in 2000, that shifted to the Enterprising area. In 2000, 28% of women were employed in Enterprising occupations and 26% were employed in Conventional occupations.

[18/25]
Because the method for calculating the income levels differed for the 1990 and 2000 census years, comparisons between the 2 years should be made with caution. The more accurate way of viewing this graph is to focus on the continued discrepancy with regard to income among the
Holland types in each of the two census periods. These numbers show wide variations in income levels among different groups.

Page 1 | 2 | 3

Get yourself a RIASEC Personality Test here (180 Questions). [FREE of CHARGE]

A Holland perspective on the U.S. workforce from 1960 to 2000 - FindArticles
Career Development Quarterly, March, 2007, by Robert C. Reardon, Emily E. Bullock, Katie E. Meyer

wikipedia.org/Holland_Codes

Holland 1960-2000 U.S. Data [1/3]

Many might know Holland's famous RIASEC theory of career choice, you might get the information through wikipedia here if you are not sure you still remember it. Here I would like to show you a presentation PPT, i made for my class discussion, to brief a research done by Robert C. Reardon, Emily E. Bullock and Katie E. Meyer. The authors analyze civilian occupations and employment data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau in 1960,1970,1980, 1990, and 2000 with respect to 6 kinds of work (Holland's RIASEC).

Get yourself a RIASEC Personality Test here (180 Questions). [FREE of CHARGE]

A Holland perspective on the U.S. workforce from 1960 to 2000 - FindArticles
Career Development Quarterly, March, 2007, by Robert C. Reardon, Emily E. Bullock, Katie E. Meyer



The authors analyze civilian occupations and employment data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau in 1960,1970,1980, 1990, and 2000 with respect to 6 kinds of work (Holland's RIASEC [Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, Conventional] classification), employment, and gender. For the 1990 and 2000 censuses, kinds of work, gender, and income are analyzed, and for the 2000 census, kinds of work, age, and gender are examined. Past employment trends developed from census data are further analyzed with respect to Bureau of Labor Statistics employment projections through 2012, Implications for further research, employment
policy, and career services are offered.

[2/25]
The research questions were as follows:

1. What were the number and percentage of persons employed in 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000 in relation to six kinds of work.
2. What were the number and percentage of persons employed in 1960, 1970, 1980,1990, and 2000 for men and women in relation to six kinds of work?
3. What were the incomes for different kinds of work for men, women, and the total population in 1990 and 2000?
4. What was the age and gender distribution of workers in six kinds of work in 2000?
5. What do census and other labor market data suggest regarding future employment trends?

[3/25]
The occupational data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau are based on census researchers' analysis of hundreds of thousands of jobs reported by persons in each census period. Researchers then categorize the detailed job information into occupational groups using the census occupational codes (U.S. Census Bureau, 1992b).

297, 440, 503, 500 and 471 are the numbers of jobs categorized by researchers in every year.

[4/25]
This graph indicates that the total estimated employment increased over the 5 decades from
63.8 million in 1960 to 121.0 million in 2000.

[5/25]
This table reveals that the Realistic area had the largest number of individuals employed and that the Artistic area had the fewest number employed. Noteworthy is the finding demonstrating that the gap between the number of people employed in the Realistic and Enterprising areas decreased from 38% in 1960 to 11% in 1990, and by the year 2000, approximately equal numbers of people were employed in both interest areas.

[6/25]
Employment in the Realistic area declined by 25% from 1960 to 2000, about 5% to 7% each decade, but it remained the largest area of employment over the 5 decades. Employment in the Enterprising area increased by 13% between 1960 and 2000 in relation to the other five areas.

[7/25]
You might have a better idea by looking into the pie chart when you scroll down from 1960 to 2000.

[9/25]
The E is growing...

[10/25]
The S is growing now...

Page 1 | 2 | 3

Get yourself a RIASEC Personality Test here (180 Questions). [FREE of CHARGE]

A Holland perspective on the U.S. workforce from 1960 to 2000 - FindArticles
Career Development Quarterly, March, 2007, by Robert C. Reardon, Emily E. Bullock, Katie E. Meyer

wikipedia.org/Holland_Codes

Philip Zimbardo: How ordinary people become monsters ... or heroes

Philip Zimbardo



The Original Milgram Experiment (1961)


I try to write something meaningful on my 200th post. Yes, I choose this Zimbardo and Milgram video to you. Hope that you find it meaningful as well. Enjoy the talk and video.

Philip Zimbardo talk download (Zipped MP4)
www.mediasales.psu.edu