اعتمادپذيري كاركن، قابليت اعتماد سرپرست و اعتماد...

18
ﺳﺎزﻣﺎﻧﻲ و ﺷﻐﻠﻲ ﻣﺸﺎوره ﻓﺼﻠﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﭼﻬﺎرم دوره/ ﺷﻤﺎره13 / زﻣﺴﺘﺎن،1391 ، 100 - 83 Quarterly Journal of Career & Organi- zational Counseling Vol, 4/ No, 13/ Fall 2012, 83-100 ا ﻋﺘﻤﺎدﭘﺬ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻋﺘﻤﺎد و ﺳﺮﭘﺮﺳﺖ اﻋﺘﻤﺎد ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﻛﺎرﻛﻦ، ﺮي ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮدي ﭘﻴﺸﺎﻳﻨﺪﻫﺎي ﻋﻨﻮان ﻣﺤ اﻧﺤﺮاﻓﻲ رﻓﺘﺎرﻫﺎي ﻛﺎر ﻴﻂEmployee’s trust propensity, supervisor’s trustworthiness and interpersonal trust as antecedents of workplace deviance ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ درﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﺗﺎرﻳﺦ: 29 / 2 / 1391 ، ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻧﺴﺨﻪ درﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﺗﺎرﻳﺦ: 18 / 4 / 1391 ، ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﭘﺬﻳﺮش ﺗﺎرﻳﺦ: 6 / 5 / 1391 ارﺷﺪي ﻧﺴﺮﻳﻦ١ و ﭘﻴﺮﻳﺎﻳﻲ ﺻﺎﻟﺤﻪ٢ ﭼﻜ ﻴﺪه: رﻓﺘﺎرﻫـﺎي ﭘﻴـﺸﺎﻳﻨﺪﻫﺎي از اﻟﮕـﻮﻳﻲ آزﻣـﻮدن ﻫﺪف ﺑﺎ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ اﻧﺠﺎم ﻣﺤﻴﻂ در اﻧﺤﺮاﻓﻲ. ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴـﺖ و ﻛـﺎرﻛﻦ اﻋﺘﻤﺎدﭘـﺬﻳﺮي اﻟﮕـﻮ اﻳﻦ در ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ، ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮﻫﺎي ﺳﺮﭘﺮﺳﺖ اﻋﺘﻤﺎد ﻣﺘﻐﻴـﺮ ﻛﺎر ﻣﺤﻴﻂ در اﻧﺤﺮاﻓﻲ رﻓﺘﺎرﻫﺎي اﻋﺘﻤﺎد و واﺑﺴﺘﻪ، ﺑﻴﻦ ﺑﻮدﻧﺪ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺠﻲ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ ﻓﺮدي. روش ﻫﻤﺒـﺴﺘﮕﻲ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ از ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎري ﻣﻌﺎدﻻت اﻟﮕﻮﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ) SEM ( ، ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ اﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ و325 روش از اﺳـﺘﻔﺎده ﺑـﺎ ﻛـﻪ ﺑـﻮد اﺻـﻔﻬﺎن آﻫـﻦ ذوب ﺷـﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﺎرﻛﻨـﺎن از ﻧﻔـﺮ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺗﺼﺎدﻓﻲ ﮔﻴﺮي ﺷﺪﻧﺪ اﻧﺘﺨﺎب اي. ﺗﻌـﺪاد اﻳﻦ از78 % و ﺑﻮدﻧـﺪ ﻣـﺮد آن ﺳﻨﻲ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻫﺎ35 ﺑـﻮد ﺳـﺎل. ﺷـﺮﻛﺖ ﺣﺎﺿـﺮ ﭘـﮋوﻫﺶ در ﻛﻨﻨـﺪﮔﺎن ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﻤﻜﺎران و ﺟﺎروﭘﺎ اﻋﺘﻤﺎدﭘﺬﻳﺮي ﻫﺎي) 1998 ( و ﻣﺎﻳﺮ اﻋﺘﻤﺎد ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ، دﻳﻮﻳﺲ) 1999 ( ﺑﻴﻦ اﻋﺘﻤﺎد، ﺑـﺎرﻟﻴﻨﮕﺮ و اﺳﻜﻮرﻣﻦ ﻓﺮدي) 2006 ( رﻓﺘﺎرﻫـﺎي و راﺑﻴﻨﺴﻮن و ﺑﻨﺖ ﻛﺎر ﻣﺤﻴﻂ در اﻧﺤﺮاﻓﻲ) 2000 ( ﻧﻤﻮدﻧـﺪ ﺗﻜﻤﻴـﻞ را. ارزﻳـﺎﺑﻲ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎري ﻣﻌﺎدﻻت اﻟﮕﻮﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ از ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎدي اﻟﮕﻮي(SEM) اﺳـﺘﻔﺎده ﺑﺎ و ﻧﺮم از اﻓﺰارﻫﺎيSPSS وﻳﺮاﺳـﺖ18 وAMOS وﻳﺮاﺳـﺖ18 ﮔﺮﻓـﺖ اﻧﺠـﺎم. واﺳﻄﻪ اﺛﺮﻫﺎي آزﻣﻮدن ﺟﻬﺖ در اﺳـﺘﺮاپ ﺑـﻮت روش از ﭘﻴـﺸﻨﻬﺎدي اﻟﮕﻮي اي ﺷـﺪ اﺳـﺘﻔﺎده ﻫﻴـﺰ و ﭘﺮﻳﭽـﺮ ﻣﺎﻛﺮوي ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﻪ. اﻟﮕـﻮي ﻛـﻪ دادﻧـﺪ ﻧـﺸﺎن ﻧﺘـﺎﻳﺞ داده ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺑﻲ ﺑﺮازش از ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎدي اﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺧﻮردار ﻫﺎ. اﺛﺮﻫ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺎي ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮﭘﺮﺳﺖ اﻋﺘﻤﺎد ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ و ﻛﺎرﻛﻦ اﻋﺘﻤﺎدﭘﺬﻳﺮي ﻣﺤﻴﻂ در اﻧﺤﺮاﻓﻲ رﻓﺘﺎرﻫﺎي اﻋﺘﻤﺎدﺑ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ از ﻛﺎر ﻧﻤﻮدﻧـﺪ درﻳﺎﻓـﺖ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻓﺮدي. ﻧﺘـﺎﻳﺞ ﺎﻓﺘـﻪ ﻫـﺎي ﺳﻮدﻣﻨﺪي ﺑﺮ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﺗﺄﻳﻴـﺪ ﻣﻬـﺮ ﺳـﺎزﻣﺎن در اﻋﺘﻤﺎد ﺗﺮوﻳﺞ ﻋﻤﻠﻲ ﻫﺎي زدﻧﺪ. ﺑﺮا اﻋﺘﻤﺎد اﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ درﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺎزده ي ﻗﺒﻴـﻞ از ﻛﻠﻴﺪي ﺳﺎزﻣﺎﻧﻲ ﻫﺎي ﻣﻲ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ اﻳﻦ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻛﺎر، ﻣﺤﻴﻂ در اﻧﺤﺮاﻓﻲ رﻓﺘﺎرﻫﺎي ﺑـﺮاي راﻫﻨﻤﺎﻳﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﺳﺎزﻣﺎن در اﻋﺘﻤﺎد اﻓﺰاﻳﺶ. ﻛﻠﻴﺪ واژ ه ﻫﺎ: ﺑـﻴﻦ اﻋﺘﻤـﺎد اﻋﺘﻤـﺎد، ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴـﺖ اﻋﺘﻤﺎدﭘﺬﻳﺮي، رﻓﺘﺎرﻫـﺎي ﻓـﺮدي، اﻧﺤﺮاﻓﻲ ﻴﻂ ﺎرN. Arshadi., (Ph.D) & S. Piriaei., (M.A) Abstract: The present study tested a model consisting precedents of workplace deviance. In this model trustworthiness and trust propensity were independent variables, workplace deviance was dependent variable, and interpersonal trust was mediator. Research design was correlation through structural equation modeling (SEM) and the sample consisted of 325 employees of Esfahan Steel Company (ESCO) who were selected by stratified random sampling method. Of this sample, 78 per cent were men and average age was 35 years. Participants of this study completed Trustworthiness Scale (Jarvepaa, et al., 1998), Trust Propensity Questionnaire (Mayer & Davis, 1999), Interpersonal Trust Questionnaire (Schoorman & Barlinger, 2006) and Workplace Deviance Questionnaire (Bennett & Robinson, 2000). Structural equation modeling (SEM) through AMOS-18 and SPSS-18 software packages was used for data analysis. In addition, Preacher and Hayes’ SPSS Macro program was used for testing mediation. The results showed that the proposed model fit the data properly. The results also supported the negative indirect effect of trustworthiness and trust propensity on workplace deviance through interpersonal trust. This study underscores the practical benefits of fostering trust in the workplace. Considering the importance of trust to key organizational outcomes, for instance workplace deviance, the results can provide a guide for increasing trust in organizations Key words: trust propensity, trustworthiness, interpersonal trust, workplace deviance [email protected] 1 . اﻫﻮاز ﭼﻤﺮان ﺷﻬﻴﺪ داﻧﺸﮕﺎه اﺳﺘﺎدﻳﺎر2 . روان ارﺷﺪ ﻛﺎرﺷﻨﺎس اﻫﻮاز ﭼﻤﺮان ﺷﻬﻴﺪ داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺳﺎزﻣﺎﻧﻲ و ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻲ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ

description

اعتمادپذيري كاركن، قابليت اعتماد سرپرست و اعتماد بينفردي بهعنوان پيشايندهاي

Transcript of اعتمادپذيري كاركن، قابليت اعتماد سرپرست و اعتماد...

  • 38-001 1931 / 31 /

    -inagrO & reeraC fo lanruoJ ylretrauQ gnilesnuoC lanoitaz 001-38 ,2102 llaF /31 ,oN /4 ,loV

    dna ssenihtrowtsurt srosivrepus ,ytisneporp tsurt seeyolpmE ecnaived ecalpkrow fo stnedecetna sa tsurt lanosrepretni

    1931/5/6: 1931/4/81: 1931/2/92:

    : .

    .

    523 (MES)

    % 87 . . 53

    (8991) ( 6002) (9991)

    . ( 0002) )MES(

    . 81 SOMA 81 SSPS

    . .

    .

    .

    .

    :

    )A.M( ,.ieairiP .S & )D.hP( ,.idahsrA .N ledom a detset yduts tneserp ehT :tcartsbA siht nI .ecnaived ecalpkrow fo stnedecerp gnitsisnoc erew ytisneporp tsurt dna ssenihtrowtsurt ledom saw ecnaived ecalpkrow ,selbairav tnednepedni saw tsurt lanosrepretni dna ,elbairav tnedneped hguorht noitalerroc saw ngised hcraeseR .rotaidem elpmas eht dna )MES( gniledom noitauqe larutcurts leetS nahafsE fo seeyolpme 523 fo detsisnoc deifitarts yb detceles erew ohw )OCSE( ynapmoC rep 87 ,elpmas siht fO .dohtem gnilpmas modnar .sraey 53 saw ega egareva dna nem erew tnec detelpmoc yduts siht fo stnapicitraP tsurT ,)8991 ,.la te ,aapevraJ( elacS ssenihtrowtsurT ,)9991 ,sivaD & reyaM( eriannoitseuQ ytisneporP & namroohcS( eriannoitseuQ tsurT lanosrepretnI ecnaiveD ecalpkroW dna )6002 ,regnilraB .)0002 ,nosniboR & ttenneB( eriannoitseuQ hguorht )MES( gniledom noitauqe larutcurtS saw segakcap erawtfos 81-SSPS dna 81-SOMA dna rehcaerP ,noitidda nI .sisylana atad rof desu gnitset rof desu saw margorp orcaM SSPS seyaH desoporp eht taht dewohs stluser ehT .noitaidem osla stluser ehT .ylreporp atad eht tif ledom fo tceffe tceridni evitagen eht detroppus ecalpkrow no ytisneporp tsurt dna ssenihtrowtsurt yduts sihT .tsurt lanosrepretni hguorht ecnaived tsurt gniretsof fo stifeneb lacitcarp eht serocsrednu fo ecnatropmi eht gniredisnoC .ecalpkrow eht ni ecnatsni rof ,semoctuo lanoitazinagro yek ot tsurt ediug a edivorp nac stluser eht ,ecnaived ecalpkrow snoitazinagro ni tsurt gnisaercni rof ,ssenihtrowtsurt ,ytisneporp tsurt :sdrow yeK ecnaived ecalpkrow ,tsurt lanosrepretni

    . 1 moc.oohay@idahsranirsan

    . 2

  • 48 1931 /31 / /

    . 1

    BDW) 2 . 6 ( 5791 5 )4 (3002 3

    . ( 7991 7 ) . ""

    9 ( 7991) 8 .

    : (. 2002 11 ( )BDW) ( BCO )01

    .

    ( ) ( 2002)

    .

    ( 0002) (. 0002 ) 21 :

    sroivaheb tnaiveD .1 BDW ,sroivaheb tnaived ecalpkroW .2 nosniboR & ttenneB .3 sroivaheb evitcudorpretnuoC .4 nniuQ & enoignaM .5 sroivaheb laicositnA .6 grebneerG & enolocaiG .7 oldiwotoM & namroB .8 ecnamrofrep ksaT .9 BCO ,sroivaheb pihsnezitic lanoitazinagrO .01 ttekcaS & odnutoR .11 ecnaived lanoitazinagrO .21

  • ...

    58

    . 1 .

    .

    2 (. 7002 3 )

    (. 1102 4 ) ) . ) (3991 5) (0991

    ( 9991 6 ) ( 3002 .

    .

    .

    .

    7- ) ( 5991 )9 (. 9002 8 4991

    . 01

    ecnaived lanosrepretnI .1 tsurT 2 eniPeL & ,ttocS ,ttiuqloC .3 sgnitsaH & llieNO .4 llewdiK .5 rotcepS & xoF .6 kcB-tlejH & ,namrets ,tsivqkrjB .7 redeorhcS .8 namroohcS & ,sivaD ,reyaM .9 tsurt lanoitazinagro fo ledom evitargetnI .01

  • 68 1931 /31 / /

    1 .

    . ( 9791 )2 (. 8002 3)

    .

    (. 8002 1002 4 - )

    ) (. 5991

    . ( )

    . .

    . (.6002 5)

    . ( 7691 )6 .

    . (. 6002 )

    ( 1102 )8 (. 5991 7 )

    .

    tsurt lanosrepretnI .1 namhuL .2 orihsnak .3 kabalaZ-yelkcohS & sillE .4 epinoC .5 rettoR .6 retsillAcM .7 abrnegeB & ,cnuruT ,kile .8

  • ...

    78

    . 1 3 . ( 3791 )2

    .

    ( 5991) . . .

    (. 5991 ) . (7691) 4 .

    .

    6(. 1102 5) . ( 4991)

    ( 5991) .

    .

    7 .

    ( 8891 )8. .

    rotsurT .1 dleifrettuB & ,renneS ,sirraF .2 ytisneporp tsurT .3 ycnatcepxe dezilareneG .4 eeL .5 nolnoC .6 eetsurT .7 attebmaG .8

  • 88 1931 /31 / /

    ( 5991) ( 5991) .

    . 3 2 1

    . ( 4991 )4 .

    .

    . .

    . .

    (. 9002 5 )

    (. 9991 )

    ( 5991) . .

    .

    5002 0102 6 ) (. 7002 7

    1102 ) ( 7002) (. 5002 1 2002 8

    ytilibA .1 ecneloveneB .2 ytirgetnI .3 grebnennoS .4 miL & naT .5 yeldarB & ,ytooG ,nivaG ,nosnhoJ , reziarF .6 salaS & ,arazzaL ,smiS ,kruB .7 nirreF & skirD .8

  • ...

    98

    .

    .

    . ( ) .

    .

    ( )

    ( ) . 1 .

    enilK .1

    .1

  • 09 1931 /31 / /

    0007 .

    1 001 ( 08 072) 053

    523 . %( 29) 523 . . 53 . % 87

    .

    6) 71 . ( 9991) 5 ( 6) ( 5) (

    ( 9991) . ( )5 ( ) 1 ( 9002) .

    0/29 0/49 . 0/09

    81-SOMA .

    0/27 0/28 . (< p0/100)0/39

    . 0/49 0/78 0/09

    ( 8991 )2 . 1 7 7 .

    ( 1102 )3. ( )7 ( ) . 0/68

    81-SOMA dohtem gnilpmas modnar deifitartS .1 rednieL & ,llonK ,aapevraJ .2 alleitaM .3

  • ...

    19

    . ( < p0/100) 0/48 . 0/59

    . ( 6002 )1 7 .

    . ( ) 5 ( ) 1 5 . 0/48 ( 6002)

    . ( < p0/100 )0/39

    . 0/48 .

    - . ( 0002) ( 7) 91

    1 7 . ( 21) ( 9002) . ( )7 ( )

    ( 7002 )2 . . 0/29 0/68

    . 0/58 0/28

    .

    ( MES) . 81 SOMA 81 SSPS

    ( 8002 )4 3

    regnilraB .1 eldraccM .2 partstooB .3 seyaH & rehcaerP .4

  • 29 1931 /31 / /

    . ( 2 (2 )1 ( 1:

    (IFG )3 ( )2 (IFI )6 (IFC )5 (IFN )4

    (.AESMR )8 ( ILT )7-

    . 1

    . 1

    erauqs-ihC .1 erusaem 2 demroN .2 tif-fo-ssendooG .3 xedni tif demroN .4 xedni tif evitarapmoC .5 xedni tif latnemercnI .6 siweL-rekcuT .7 noitamixorppa fo rorre erauqs-naem-tooR .8

    1 2 3 4 5 6

    1 02/5 5/28 __

    2 71/6 6/23 0/08 __

    3 02/5 7/15 0/09 0/29 __

    4 23 41/31 0/19 0/68 0/39 __

    5 23/2 21/69 0/39 0/38 0/39 0/79 __

    28 61/47 -0/98 -0/97 -0/98 -0/59 -0/39 __

    6

    93/4 9/11 -0/97 -0/86 -0/97 -0/58 -0/18 0/59

    7

    24/6 8/82 -0/29 -0/29 -0/19 -0/69 -0/79 0/69

    8

    .p

  • ...

    39

    1 4) 6

    . ( 1 .

    . 2

    . 2

    fd IFG ILT IFC IFN AESMR IFI 2 fd 2

    - 0/99 41/8 8 (p > 0/50) 1/58 0/99 0/89 1 0/99 0/40

    2

    . - .

    2/00 ( )

    0/09 IFG . 5/00 0/09 IFN ILT IFC IFI .

    (AESMR) . 0/80 0/50

    2 . 0/1 . .

  • 49 1931 /31 / /

    2

    (.p

  • ...

    59

    3 59 .

    . 0002 1

    . 1102 )

    (. 7002 .

    . ( 9991) ( 0102) (9002)

    ( 7691) . .

    ) (5991) (. 5002

    ) . ( ) (

    (. 4991 )

    (. 4891 2 )

    ( 7002) ( 5991) . ( 5991)

    ( 5991 ) .

    gnilpmaseR .1 llertnaC & reltuB .2

  • 69 1931 /31 / /

    .

    . .

    . ( 8002 )1 ( 7002) (1102) (. 1002 )

    (8791 2 )

    .

    ( 1102) (. 1002 3 ) .

    .

    . . ( 9002) ( 1002) (7002)

    (1102 5691 )4

    . .

    . ) ( )

    ( )

    (. 5991 ( )

    mihaR ludbA .1 reffefP & kicnalaS .2 nospmohT & naimahS ,regnihcsaL .3 nosniveL .4

  • ...

    79

    .

    (. 7002 )

    (7691 ) .

    .

    .

    .

    . .

    . .

    .

    .

    . .

    .

    .

    .

  • / / 13/ 1391 98

    Abdul Rahim, A. R. B., (2008). Predictors of workplace deviant behavior in Malaysia. A Doctoral Dissertation of Philosophy: Sains Malaysia University.

    Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 349-360.

    Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2003). The past, present, and future of workplace deviance research. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science, 247-281. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance. 10, 99-109.

    Burke, C. S., Sims, D. E., Lazzara, E. H., & Salas, E. (2007). Trust in leadership: A multi-level review and integration. The Leadership Quarterly 18, 606-632.

    Butler, J. K. & Cantrell, R. S. (1984). A behavioural decision theory approach to modelling dyadic trust in superiors and subordinates. Psychological Reports, 55, 19-28.

    elik, M., Turunc, ., & Begenrbas, M. (2011). The role of organizational trust, burnout and interpersonal deviance for achieving organizational performance. International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 3, 8047-1309.

    Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust Propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 909-927.

    Conipe, J, S. (2006). Relationship among trust, organizational commitment, perceived organizational support and turnover intention. A Doctoral Dissertation of Philosophy: Alliant International University.

    Conlon, E. J., & Mayer, R. C. (1994). The effect of trust on principal-agent dyads: An empirical investigation of stewardship and agency. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Dallas, TX.

    Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 611-628.

    Farris, G., Senner, E., & Butterfield, D. (1993). Trust, culture and organizational behavior. Industrial relations, 12, 144-157.

    Fox, S., & Spector, P. E. (1999). A model of work frustration-aggression. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 915-931.

    Frazier, M. L., Johnson, P. D., Gavin, M., Gooty, J., & Bradley, D. (2010). Examination of organizational justice, trustworthiness, and trust: A multifoci. Group Organization Management, 35, 39-76.

    Gambetta, D. G. (1988). Can we trust? In D. G. Gambetta (Ed), Trust: 213-237. New York: Basil Blackwell.

    Giacalone, R., & Greenberg, J. (1997) Antisocial Behavior in Organizations. London: SAGE.

    Greenberg, J. (1990). Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of pay cuts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 561-568.

    Jarvenpaa, S. L., Knoll, K., & Leidner, D. E. (1998). Is anybody out there? Antecedents of trust in global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14, 29-64.

  • ...

    99

    Kaneshiro, P. (2008). Analyzing the organizational justice, trust and commitment relationship in a public organization. A Doctoral Dissertation of Philosophy: North central University.

    Kidwell, R. E., & Bennett, N. (1993). Employee propensity to withhold effort: A conceptual model to intersect three avenues of research. Academy of Management Review, 18, 429-456.

    Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and Practices of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford Press.

    Laschinger, H. K. P., Shamian, J., & Thompson, D. (2001). Impact of magnet hospital characteristics on nurses perceptions of trust, burnout, quality of care and work satisfactions. Nurse Economics, 19, 209-219.

    Lee, H. W. (2011). Individual differences in trust development: Assessing the effects of trustor attributes on trust building, stability and dissolution. A Doctoral Dissertation of Philosophy: University of Southern California.

    Levinson, H. (1965). Reciprocation: The relationship between man and organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9, 370-390.

    Lind, E. A. (2001). Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in Organizational Justice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power: Two works by Niklas Luhmann. In R. W. Perry & L. D. Mankin (Eds.), Organizational trust, trust in the chief executive and work satisfaction. Public Personnel Management, 36, 165-179.

    Mangione. T. & Quinn, R. (1975). Job satisfaction, counterproductive behavior, and drug use at work. Journal of Applied Psychology. 60, 114-116.

    Matiella, M. S., (2011). The role of trust in high reliability organizing: The moderating effect of organizational trust in temporary, inter-agency group dynamics. A Doctoral Dissertation of Philosophy: George Washington University.

    Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (1999). The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust for management: A field of quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 123-136.

    Mayer, R. C., & Gavin, M. B. (2005). Trust in management and performance: Who minds the shop while employees watch the boss? Academy of Management Journal, 48, 874-888.

    Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709-734.

    McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 24-59.

    Mccardle, J. G., (2007). Organizational justice and workplace deviance: The role of organizational structure, powerlessness and information salience. A Doctoral Dissertation of Philosophy: University of Central Florida.

    ONeill, T. A., & Hastings, S. E. (2011). Explaining workplace deviant behavior with more than just the Big Five. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 268-273.

  • / / 13/ 1391 100

    Preacher, K. J. & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior research methods, 40, 879-891.

    Rotter, J. B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal of Personality, 35, 651665.

    Rotundo, M., & Sackett, P. R. (2002). The relative importance of task, citizenship, and counterproductive performance to global ratings of job performance: A policy capturing approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 66-80.

    Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224-53.

    Schoorman, F. D., & Ballinger, G. A. (2006). Leadership, trust and client service in veterinary hospitals. Working paper, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.

    Schroeder, N. A. (2009). Cultural differences as a mediator of perceptions of injustice and workplace deviance. A Thesis of Master of Science: Graduate School of Clemson University.

    Sonnenberg, F. K. (1994). Trust me trust me not. Journal of Business Strategy, 15, 14-16.

    Tan, H. H., & Lim, A. K. H. (2009). Trust in coworkers and trust in organizations. Journal of Psychology, 143, 45-66.