東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Promotion-focused and prevention-foc...

Imai, Rin (Lynn).

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Promotion-focused and prevention-focused? Regulatory focus ambidexterity and its effects on team processes and outcomes.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Promotion-focused and prevention-focused? Regulatory focus ambidexterity and its effects on team processes and outcomes./
作者:	Imai, Rin (Lynn).
面頁冊數:	154 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 73-12(E), Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International73-12B(E).
標題:	Occupational psychology. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3517838
ISBN:	9781267483850

Promotion-focused and prevention-focused? Regulatory focus ambidexterity and its effects on team processes and outcomes.
Imai, Rin (Lynn).

Promotion-focused and prevention-focused? Regulatory focus ambidexterity and its effects on team processes and outcomes. - 154 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 73-12(E), Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Maryland, College Park, 2012.

Regulatory Focus Theory (Higgins, 1997, 1998), which states that individuals have distinct processes through which they approach desired end-states, has generated a tremendous amount of research activity in recent years. This literature shows that whether an individual pursues a goal with either a promotion focus or a prevention focus has important psychological consequences. However, research has focused largely on the individual-level, and not the team-level consequences of regulatory focus. Furthermore, the paradigm of contrasting the predominantly promotion-focused from the predominantly prevention-focused has precluded researchers from understanding the role of ambidextrous individuals who are simultaneously promotion-focused and prevention-focused.

ISBN: 9781267483850Subjects--Topical Terms:

2122852
Occupational psychology.

Promotion-focused and prevention-focused? Regulatory focus ambidexterity and its effects on team processes and outcomes.
LDR:03419nmm a2200301 4500 001 2073120
005 20160914074007.5
008 170521s2012 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781267483850
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3517838
035 $a AAI3517838
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Imai, Rin (Lynn). $3 3188347
245 1 0 $a Promotion-focused and prevention-focused? Regulatory focus ambidexterity and its effects on team processes and outcomes.
300 $a 154 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 73-12(E), Section: B.
500 $a Adviser: Michele J. Gelfand.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Maryland, College Park, 2012.
520 $a Regulatory Focus Theory (Higgins, 1997, 1998), which states that individuals have distinct processes through which they approach desired end-states, has generated a tremendous amount of research activity in recent years. This literature shows that whether an individual pursues a goal with either a promotion focus or a prevention focus has important psychological consequences. However, research has focused largely on the individual-level, and not the team-level consequences of regulatory focus. Furthermore, the paradigm of contrasting the predominantly promotion-focused from the predominantly prevention-focused has precluded researchers from understanding the role of ambidextrous individuals who are simultaneously promotion-focused and prevention-focused.
520 $a Accordingly, the goal of this dissertation was to examine whether having a higher proportion of certain regulatory focus types in the team (i.e., predominantly promotion-focused, predominantly prevention-focused, and ambidextrous types) is advantageous for team creativity and team timeliness, as well as the team processes that lead to each outcome. It was proposed that 1) teams with a higher proportion of predominantly promotion-focused types are more likely to attain team creativity as well as the processes that lead to it (i.e., placement of goal importance on creativity, idea generation, and task conflict), and 2) teams with a higher proportion of predominantly prevention-focused types are more likely to attain team timeliness as well as the processes that lead to it (i.e., placement of goal importance on timeliness and adoption of an early team pacing style). This dissertation also explored whether teams with higher proportion of ambidextrous types are more likely to attain higher team creativity and team timeliness, as well as the team processes that lead to these outcomes, relative to teams with lower proportions of such individuals.
520 $a Based on a lab study of 89 simulated project teams, it was found as expected, that teams with higher proportions of ambidextrous types achieved greater team creativity than teams with lower proportions of such individuals. It was also found unexpectedly, that teams with higher proportions of ambidextrous types placed less importance on timeliness as a goal at the outset of the team task. In all, hypotheses were largely unsupported. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed along with directions for future research.
590 $a School code: 0117.
650 4 $a Occupational psychology. $3 2122852
650 4 $a Organizational behavior. $3 516683
690 $a 0624
690 $a 0703
710 2 $a University of Maryland, College Park. $b Psychology. $3 1020673
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 73-12B(E).
790 $a 0117
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2012
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3517838