:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:PISA配對題型之人格量表的初探
書刊名:教育與心理研究
作者:朱錦鳳 引用關係
作者(外文):Ju, Gin-fon
出版日期:2012
卷期:35:2
頁次:頁119-151
主題關鍵詞:PISA人格量表社會期許配對題The PISA personality scaleMBTISocial desirabilityPair-itemEPPS
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:11
  • 點閱點閱:47
PISA人格量表是根據MBTI人格量表的理論架構為基礎,再經本土文化的修正後所編製而成的。MBTI主要應用Jung的人格理論,目前普遍應用於企業工商的人事甄選。PISA人格量表主要以國內企業最重視的四個要項為主軸:特質(Personality)、智能(Intelligence)、社會性(Sociality)和態度(Attitude)。每個主軸又分兩個極端向度,分別為「陽剛-陰柔」特質、「左腦-右腦」智能、「個體-群體」社會性及「嚴謹-率直」態度,共包含八個特質。企業機構可從這四項主軸之人格組合來判斷應徵者比較適配的部門或工作。通常,企業用人格量表比較容易會有作假或符合社會期許的情況發生,因此,PISA人格量表主要是以配對題方式呈現,包含句子及形容詞兩種題型,與MBTI類似。但MBTI的配對方式主要為四大主軸的兩極端特質配對而成,而PISA則是參考EPPS以社會期許值相近的方式與其他七種特質配對而成,目的在降低作假或符合社會期許的可能性。PISA人格量表經過複雜的項目分析修題及題目配對過程,最後獲得良好的信、效度。PISA人格量表以再測信度及Cronbach’s a驗證信度,並以內容效度、建構效度及效標關聯效度驗證其效度。此外,為顧及國內紙筆計分的型態,PISA人格量表突破MBTI計分的複雜度,而以EPPS的結構計分方式為基礎,再加上設計對角線的重複題來檢核受試者有無專心作答。PISA人格量表期望未來能有效應用於大專畢業生的職涯發展及成為工商企業人資管理的甄選工具。
The PISA personality scale is based on the structure of MBTI but adapted to Chinese cultural characteristics. MBTI is popular used in America for industry and organization personnel assessment. The PISA majorly measures four facets of important factors which I/O may emphasize in our country: Personality, Intelligence, Sociality, and Attitude. Each facet includes two sided characteristics: masculine vs. feminine personality, left-brain vs. right-brain intelligence, individual vs. group social style, and precautious vs. instinct attitude. There are total of eight characteristics. Supervisors may evaluate the employee's PISA by the combination of the four facets and eight characteristics for the best fitted job positions. Due to the bias of lie and social desirability for I/O personnel measures, the PISA is presented by the pair items for sentences and adjectives as MBTI in order to reduce the bias. However, the difference is that MBTI matched the items by two sided of each facet while PISA tried to match them by two out of eight characteristics with equal social desirability as EPPS. Through the complicated item analysis, the PISA obtained good results on the test-retest reliability and Cronbach's α coefficient, and yielded the good results of content, construct, and criterion-related validation. In addition, the PISA substitutes the difficulty of MBTI hand-scoring method with taking the advantages of EPPS scoring structure. The PISA also added the validity scale using repeat item technique similar to EPPS consistency score. The PISA is expected to be a good personality measurement for senior college students and industrial employees.
期刊論文
1.Chiu, Hung-Chang、Hsieh, Yi-Ching、Li, Yu-Chuan、Lee, Monle(2005)。Relationship marketing and consumer switching behavior。Journal of Business Research,58(12),1681-1689。  new window
2.Connell, R. W.(1996)。Teaching the boys: New research on masculinity, and gender strategies for schools。Teachers College Record,98(2),206-235。  new window
3.Rotter, J. B.(1966)。Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement。Psychological Monographs: General and Applied,80(1)=609,1-28。  new window
4.Spreitzer, Gretchen M.(1995)。Psychological Empowerment in the Workplace: Dimensions, Measurement, and Validation。Academy of Management Journal,38(5),1442-1465。  new window
5.陳春希、李旭梅、鄭晉昌、魏裕興(20090100)。工作身份、角色衝突與組織承諾對組織公民行為影響之探究:以臺灣高速鐵路BOT計畫案為例。輔仁管理評論,16(1),1-18。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.Costa, Paul T. Jr.、McCrae, Robert R.(1992)。Four ways five factors are basic。Personality and Individual Differences,13(6),653-665。  new window
7.林一真、路君約、簡茂發、Lin, I. C.、Lu, C. Y.、Chien, M. F.、Lu, C. M.(1988)。職業探索量表修訂報告。中國測驗學會測驗年刊 \=Psychological Testing,35,65-76。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.Gerbing, D. W.、Ahadi, S. A.、Patton, J. H.(1987)。Toward a conceptualization of impulsirity: Components across the behaviroal and self-report domains。Multivariate Behavioral Research,5,357-379。  new window
9.Raymark, P. H.、Schmit, M. J.、Guion, R. M.(1997)。Identifying potentially useful personality constructs for employee selection。Personnel Psychology,50,723-736。  new window
10.Sperry, R. W.(1961)。Cerebral organization and behavior。Science,133,1749-1757。  new window
11.Sperry, R. W.(1963)。Chemoaffmity in the orderly growth of nerve fiber patterns and connections。Proc. Nat. Acad Sci USA,50,703-710。  new window
會議論文
1.You, M. H.(2008)。性別平等、多元文化與性別教育:「公民與社會」課程的性別實踐初探。宜蘭縣。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.黃至賢(2004)。客服人員的人格特質對其工作績效之影響(碩士論文)。國立政治大學,台北市。  延伸查詢new window
2.廖家玲(2002)。員工人格特質、金錢態度與工作績效及離職行為之探索性研究(碩士論文)。長庚大學,桃園市。  延伸查詢new window
3.江錦樺(2001)。人格特質與組織文化之適配性對工作績效之影響--以高科技F公司為例(碩士論文)。國立中央大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Edwards, A. L.(1959)。Edwards Personal Preference Schedule Manual。New York, NY:Psychological Corporation。  new window
2.Carter, Rita、洪蘭(2002)。大腦的祕密檔案。遠流出版社。  延伸查詢new window
3.洪蘭、Doidge, Norman(2008)。改變是大腦的天性。臺北市:遠流。  延伸查詢new window
4.Myers, I. B.、McCaulley, M. H.(1985)。Manual: a guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator。Palo Alto, CA:Consulting Psychologists Press。  new window
5.Murray, H. A.(1938)。Explorations in personality。New York:Oxford University Press。  new window
6.Rotter, J. B.(1954)。Social Learning and Clinical Psychology。Prentice-Hall。  new window
7.Ju, G.(2010)。心理測驗--理論與應用。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
8.Wu, W. T.(2008)。多元智能評量丙式。臺北市:心理。  延伸查詢new window
9.林美珠、周東山、Lin, M. C.、Chou, T. S.、Lin, C. W.(2009)。艾德華個人偏好量表。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
10.Lai, P. C.(2003)。賴氏人格測驗。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
11.Murray, H. A.(1943)。Thematic apperception test: Manual。Cambridge, MA。  new window
12.Tong, R.(1996)。Feminist thought: A more comprehensive introduction。Boulder, CO。  new window
圖書論文
1.Sperry, R. W.(1982)。Science and moral priority: Merging mind, brain and human values。Convergence。New York:Columbia University Press。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關書籍
 
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE