본문 바로가기
HOME> 저널/프로시딩 > 저널/프로시딩 검색상세

저널/프로시딩 상세정보

권호별목차 / 소장처보기

H : 소장처정보

T : 목차정보

Journal of personality and social psychology 14건

  1. [해외논문]   Familiarity and differences in self- and other-representations.  

    Prentice, Deborah A.
    Journal of personality and social psychology v.59 no.3 ,pp. 369 - 383 , 1990 , 0022-3514 ,

    초록

    원문보기

    원문보기
    무료다운로드 유료다운로드

    회원님의 원문열람 권한에 따라 열람이 불가능 할 수 있으며 권한이 없는 경우 해당 사이트의 정책에 따라 회원가입 및 유료구매가 필요할 수 있습니다.이동하는 사이트에서의 모든 정보이용은 NDSL과 무관합니다.

    NDSL에서는 해당 원문을 복사서비스하고 있습니다. 아래의 원문복사신청 또는 장바구니담기를 통하여 원문복사서비스 이용이 가능합니다.

    이미지

    Fig. 1 이미지
  2. [해외논문]   "Do I know you?": The role of significant others in general social perception.  

    Andersen, Susan M. , Cole, Steve W.
    Journal of personality and social psychology v.59 no.3 ,pp. 384 - 399 , 1990 , 0022-3514 ,

    초록

    원문보기

    원문보기
    무료다운로드 유료다운로드

    회원님의 원문열람 권한에 따라 열람이 불가능 할 수 있으며 권한이 없는 경우 해당 사이트의 정책에 따라 회원가입 및 유료구매가 필요할 수 있습니다.이동하는 사이트에서의 모든 정보이용은 NDSL과 무관합니다.

    NDSL에서는 해당 원문을 복사서비스하고 있습니다. 아래의 원문복사신청 또는 장바구니담기를 통하여 원문복사서비스 이용이 가능합니다.

    이미지

    Fig. 1 이미지
  3. [해외논문]   The influence of mood on categorization: A cognitive flexibility interpretation.  

    Murray, Noel , Sujan, Harish , Hirt, Edward R. , Sujan, Mita
    Journal of personality and social psychology v.59 no.3 ,pp. 411 - 425 , 1990 , 0022-3514 ,

    초록

    원문보기

    원문보기
    무료다운로드 유료다운로드

    회원님의 원문열람 권한에 따라 열람이 불가능 할 수 있으며 권한이 없는 경우 해당 사이트의 정책에 따라 회원가입 및 유료구매가 필요할 수 있습니다.이동하는 사이트에서의 모든 정보이용은 NDSL과 무관합니다.

    NDSL에서는 해당 원문을 복사서비스하고 있습니다. 아래의 원문복사신청 또는 장바구니담기를 통하여 원문복사서비스 이용이 가능합니다.

    이미지

    Fig. 1 이미지
  4. [해외논문]   Credit and blame among American and Japanese children: Normative, cultural, and individual differences.  

    Hamilton, V. Lee , Blumenfeld, Phyllis C. , Akoh, Hiroshi , Miura, Kanae
    Journal of personality and social psychology v.59 no.3 ,pp. 442 - 451 , 1990 , 0022-3514 ,

    초록

    원문보기

    원문보기
    무료다운로드 유료다운로드

    회원님의 원문열람 권한에 따라 열람이 불가능 할 수 있으며 권한이 없는 경우 해당 사이트의 정책에 따라 회원가입 및 유료구매가 필요할 수 있습니다.이동하는 사이트에서의 모든 정보이용은 NDSL과 무관합니다.

    NDSL에서는 해당 원문을 복사서비스하고 있습니다. 아래의 원문복사신청 또는 장바구니담기를 통하여 원문복사서비스 이용이 가능합니다.

    이미지

    Fig. 1 이미지
  5. [해외논문]   Perceived social support, self-efficacy, and adjustment to abortion.  

    Major, Brenda , Cozzarelli, Catherine , Sciacchitano, Anne Marie , Cooper, M. Lynne , Testa, Maria , Mueller, Pallas M.
    Journal of personality and social psychology v.59 no.3 ,pp. 452 - 463 , 1990 , 0022-3514 ,

    초록

    원문보기

    원문보기
    무료다운로드 유료다운로드

    회원님의 원문열람 권한에 따라 열람이 불가능 할 수 있으며 권한이 없는 경우 해당 사이트의 정책에 따라 회원가입 및 유료구매가 필요할 수 있습니다.이동하는 사이트에서의 모든 정보이용은 NDSL과 무관합니다.

    NDSL에서는 해당 원문을 복사서비스하고 있습니다. 아래의 원문복사신청 또는 장바구니담기를 통하여 원문복사서비스 이용이 가능합니다.

    이미지

    Fig. 1 이미지
  6. [해외논문]   Rational selective exploitation and distress: employee reactions to performance-based and mobility-based reward allocations.  

    Rusbult, C E ; Campbell, M A ; Price, M E
    Journal of personality and social psychology v.59 no.3 ,pp. 487 - 500 , 1990 , 0022-3514 ,

    초록

    Prior research has demonstrated that allocators frequently distribute greater rewards to persons with high professional and geographic mobility than to persons with constrained mobility, especially among the very competent. This phenomenon has been termed rational selective exploitation. Do the recipients of such allocations actually experience this distribution rule as unjust and distressing, or is it a misnomer to refer to this phenomenon as exploitation? Two studies were conducted to explore this question. Study 1 was a laboratory experiment in which we manipulated relative performance level, relative mobility level, and allocation standard: performance based versus mobility based. Study 2 was a cross-sectional survey of actual employees in which subjects reported the degree to which performance and mobility were the basis for pay decisions at their places of employment, as well as the degree to which they perceived each standard to be fair. Both studies demonstrated that people regard mobility-based allocations as less fair and more distressing than performance-based allocations. Furthermore, the degree of distress resulting from mobility-based allocations is greater among persons who are disadvantaged by that standard: among people with constrained mobility, especially those who perform at high levels. These findings provide good support for the assertion that so-called rational selective exploitation is indeed distressing to employees. Reactions to this form of distress are also explored, and the implications of these findings for the allocation process are discussed.

    원문보기

    원문보기
    무료다운로드 유료다운로드

    회원님의 원문열람 권한에 따라 열람이 불가능 할 수 있으며 권한이 없는 경우 해당 사이트의 정책에 따라 회원가입 및 유료구매가 필요할 수 있습니다.이동하는 사이트에서의 모든 정보이용은 NDSL과 무관합니다.

    NDSL에서는 해당 원문을 복사서비스하고 있습니다. 아래의 원문복사신청 또는 장바구니담기를 통하여 원문복사서비스 이용이 가능합니다.

    이미지

    Fig. 1 이미지
  7. [해외논문]   Similarity of outcomes, interdependence, and conflict in dating relationships.  

    Surra, Catherine A. , Longstreth, Molly
    Journal of personality and social psychology v.59 no.3 ,pp. 501 - 516 , 1990 , 0022-3514 ,

    초록

    Prior research has demonstrated that allocators frequently distribute greater rewards to persons with high professional and geographic mobility than to persons with constrained mobility, especially among the very competent. This phenomenon has been termed rational selective exploitation. Do the recipients of such allocations actually experience this distribution rule as unjust and distressing, or is it a misnomer to refer to this phenomenon as exploitation? Two studies were conducted to explore this question. Study 1 was a laboratory experiment in which we manipulated relative performance level, relative mobility level, and allocation standard: performance based versus mobility based. Study 2 was a cross-sectional survey of actual employees in which subjects reported the degree to which performance and mobility were the basis for pay decisions at their places of employment, as well as the degree to which they perceived each standard to be fair. Both studies demonstrated that people regard mobility-based allocations as less fair and more distressing than performance-based allocations. Furthermore, the degree of distress resulting from mobility-based allocations is greater among persons who are disadvantaged by that standard: among people with constrained mobility, especially those who perform at high levels. These findings provide good support for the assertion that so-called rational selective exploitation is indeed distressing to employees. Reactions to this form of distress are also explored, and the implications of these findings for the allocation process are discussed.

    원문보기

    원문보기
    무료다운로드 유료다운로드

    회원님의 원문열람 권한에 따라 열람이 불가능 할 수 있으며 권한이 없는 경우 해당 사이트의 정책에 따라 회원가입 및 유료구매가 필요할 수 있습니다.이동하는 사이트에서의 모든 정보이용은 NDSL과 무관합니다.

    NDSL에서는 해당 원문을 복사서비스하고 있습니다. 아래의 원문복사신청 또는 장바구니담기를 통하여 원문복사서비스 이용이 가능합니다.

    이미지

    Fig. 1 이미지
  8. [해외논문]   Effect of actor depression on observer attributions: Existence and impact of negative attributions toward the depressed.  

    Sacco, William P. , Dunn, Victoria K.
    Journal of personality and social psychology v.59 no.3 ,pp. 517 - 524 , 1990 , 0022-3514 ,

    초록

    Prior research has demonstrated that allocators frequently distribute greater rewards to persons with high professional and geographic mobility than to persons with constrained mobility, especially among the very competent. This phenomenon has been termed rational selective exploitation. Do the recipients of such allocations actually experience this distribution rule as unjust and distressing, or is it a misnomer to refer to this phenomenon as exploitation? Two studies were conducted to explore this question. Study 1 was a laboratory experiment in which we manipulated relative performance level, relative mobility level, and allocation standard: performance based versus mobility based. Study 2 was a cross-sectional survey of actual employees in which subjects reported the degree to which performance and mobility were the basis for pay decisions at their places of employment, as well as the degree to which they perceived each standard to be fair. Both studies demonstrated that people regard mobility-based allocations as less fair and more distressing than performance-based allocations. Furthermore, the degree of distress resulting from mobility-based allocations is greater among persons who are disadvantaged by that standard: among people with constrained mobility, especially those who perform at high levels. These findings provide good support for the assertion that so-called rational selective exploitation is indeed distressing to employees. Reactions to this form of distress are also explored, and the implications of these findings for the allocation process are discussed.

    원문보기

    원문보기
    무료다운로드 유료다운로드

    회원님의 원문열람 권한에 따라 열람이 불가능 할 수 있으며 권한이 없는 경우 해당 사이트의 정책에 따라 회원가입 및 유료구매가 필요할 수 있습니다.이동하는 사이트에서의 모든 정보이용은 NDSL과 무관합니다.

    NDSL에서는 해당 원문을 복사서비스하고 있습니다. 아래의 원문복사신청 또는 장바구니담기를 통하여 원문복사서비스 이용이 가능합니다.

    이미지

    Fig. 1 이미지
  9. [해외논문]   Coping as a personality process: A prospective study.  

    Bolger, Niall
    Journal of personality and social psychology v.59 no.3 ,pp. 525 - 537 , 1990 , 0022-3514 ,

    초록

    Prior research has demonstrated that allocators frequently distribute greater rewards to persons with high professional and geographic mobility than to persons with constrained mobility, especially among the very competent. This phenomenon has been termed rational selective exploitation. Do the recipients of such allocations actually experience this distribution rule as unjust and distressing, or is it a misnomer to refer to this phenomenon as exploitation? Two studies were conducted to explore this question. Study 1 was a laboratory experiment in which we manipulated relative performance level, relative mobility level, and allocation standard: performance based versus mobility based. Study 2 was a cross-sectional survey of actual employees in which subjects reported the degree to which performance and mobility were the basis for pay decisions at their places of employment, as well as the degree to which they perceived each standard to be fair. Both studies demonstrated that people regard mobility-based allocations as less fair and more distressing than performance-based allocations. Furthermore, the degree of distress resulting from mobility-based allocations is greater among persons who are disadvantaged by that standard: among people with constrained mobility, especially those who perform at high levels. These findings provide good support for the assertion that so-called rational selective exploitation is indeed distressing to employees. Reactions to this form of distress are also explored, and the implications of these findings for the allocation process are discussed.

    원문보기

    원문보기
    무료다운로드 유료다운로드

    회원님의 원문열람 권한에 따라 열람이 불가능 할 수 있으며 권한이 없는 경우 해당 사이트의 정책에 따라 회원가입 및 유료구매가 필요할 수 있습니다.이동하는 사이트에서의 모든 정보이용은 NDSL과 무관합니다.

    NDSL에서는 해당 원문을 복사서비스하고 있습니다. 아래의 원문복사신청 또는 장바구니담기를 통하여 원문복사서비스 이용이 가능합니다.

    이미지

    Fig. 1 이미지
  10. [해외논문]   Self-esteem and clarity of the self-concept.  

    Campbell, Jennifer D.
    Journal of personality and social psychology v.59 no.3 ,pp. 538 - 549 , 1990 , 0022-3514 ,

    초록

    Prior research has demonstrated that allocators frequently distribute greater rewards to persons with high professional and geographic mobility than to persons with constrained mobility, especially among the very competent. This phenomenon has been termed rational selective exploitation. Do the recipients of such allocations actually experience this distribution rule as unjust and distressing, or is it a misnomer to refer to this phenomenon as exploitation? Two studies were conducted to explore this question. Study 1 was a laboratory experiment in which we manipulated relative performance level, relative mobility level, and allocation standard: performance based versus mobility based. Study 2 was a cross-sectional survey of actual employees in which subjects reported the degree to which performance and mobility were the basis for pay decisions at their places of employment, as well as the degree to which they perceived each standard to be fair. Both studies demonstrated that people regard mobility-based allocations as less fair and more distressing than performance-based allocations. Furthermore, the degree of distress resulting from mobility-based allocations is greater among persons who are disadvantaged by that standard: among people with constrained mobility, especially those who perform at high levels. These findings provide good support for the assertion that so-called rational selective exploitation is indeed distressing to employees. Reactions to this form of distress are also explored, and the implications of these findings for the allocation process are discussed.

    원문보기

    원문보기
    무료다운로드 유료다운로드

    회원님의 원문열람 권한에 따라 열람이 불가능 할 수 있으며 권한이 없는 경우 해당 사이트의 정책에 따라 회원가입 및 유료구매가 필요할 수 있습니다.이동하는 사이트에서의 모든 정보이용은 NDSL과 무관합니다.

    NDSL에서는 해당 원문을 복사서비스하고 있습니다. 아래의 원문복사신청 또는 장바구니담기를 통하여 원문복사서비스 이용이 가능합니다.

    이미지

    Fig. 1 이미지

논문관련 이미지