바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

  • P-ISSN1229-0653
  • KCI

ISSN : 1229-0653

논문 상세

이전
논문 투고

Vol.24 No.4

Citation Share

양자관계에서 조절초점부합과 과제요구가 공동수행자의 선택에 미치는 영향

The Effects of Regulatory Focus-fits among Self, Partner and Task Demands upon Partner Choice in Collective Task

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격 / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2010, v.24 no.4, pp.113-131
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2010.24.4.006
한덕웅 (성균관대학교)
양모현 (성균관대학교)
표승연 (성균관대학교)
한덕웅, 양모현, & 표승연. (2010). 양자관계에서 조절초점부합과 과제요구가 공동수행자의 선택에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 24(4), 113-131, https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2010.24.4.006

초록

본 연구에서는 두 사람이 짝을 이루어 공동으로 집합과제를 수행하는 상황에서 자기와 상대의 만성적 동기지향성인 조절초점과 아울러 과제에서 요구하는 전략이 서로 부합하는 수준에 따라서 상대의 선택이 어떻게 달라지는지 실험을 통하여 알아내었다. 조절초점부합가설을 대인관계로 확장하여 양자관계에서 과제요구의 조절초점에 부합하는 상대일수록 많이 선택한다는 가설을 설정하였다. 먼저 자기의 향상조절초점이나 예방조절초점이 각각 높은 사람들을 선별하고, 이들에게 향상조절초점과 예방조절초점이 각각 높은 사람들을 제시한 다음에 자신과 공동수행을 함께 할 상대를 선택하도록 하였다. 본 연구에서 얻은 중요한 결과들은 다음과 같다: ⑴자기와 과제요구의 조절초점이 부합하면 자신과 부합하는 상대를 부합하지 않는 사람보다 많이 선택하였다. 이 현상은 향상조절초점이나 예방조절초점이 높은 사람들에서 모두 일관되게 나타났다. ⑵자기와 조절초점이 부합하는 상대를 부합하지 않는 상대보다 많이 선택하였다. ⑶과제수행의 전략으로 향상과제, 예방과제 및 복합과제의 세 과제요구에 따라서 자기와 조절초점이 부합하는 상대를 선택한 반응이 달라져서 3원 상호작용 효과가 나타났다. 자기향상조절초점이 높은 사람들은 과제요구와 상관없이 자신과 부합하는 상대를 많이 선택한 바와 달리 자기예방조절초점이 높은 사람들은 예방과제에서만 이 현상을 보였다. 끝으로 본 연구의 한계와 장래 연구를 위한 시사점들도 논의하였다.

keywords
dyad regulatory focus-fits, self-regulatory focus, promotion focus, prevention focus, task demands, collective task, partner choice, interpersonal attraction, social attraction, 양자관계, 조절초점부합, 조절초점이론, 향상조절초점, 예방조절초점, 과제요구, 공동수행 상대 선택, 대인매력, 사회매력

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate through a laboratory experiment the effects of regulatory focus-fits among dyad and task demands upon partner choice in collective task. It was hypothesized that the higher the regulatory focus among self, partner, and task demands, the higher the choice as the participant's partner. The experiment was performed with 2 self-regulatory focus(promotion vs. prevention) × ⑵ regulatory focus-fits between self and partner(fit vs. nonfit) × 3 task demands(promotion vs. prevention vs. mixed strategy) randomized mixed factorial design. Self-regulatory focus was measured by two self-regulation scales and the participants with high-promotion or high-prevention focus were selected. Regulatory focus of two potential partners were manipulated by two questionnaires. The task demands were framed in terms of the task performance strategies. Ninety eight participants were randomly assigned to 6 conditions. The results of this study showed that the main hypothesis of regulatory-fits were confirmed: ⑴Participants chose good-fit partners more than poor-fit partners. ⑵Higher choice of good-fit partners was consistently observed among the participants with high-promotion focus in spite of differences in task demands. But choice of good-fit partners was differently appeared according to the task demands. ⑶Three way interaction effect of self-regulatory focus, self-partner regulatory fits and task demands were also found. The results of this study were discussed in terms of the regulatory focus-fit hypotheses and the limitations of this study and the suggestions for further study were added.

keywords
dyad regulatory focus-fits, self-regulatory focus, promotion focus, prevention focus, task demands, collective task, partner choice, interpersonal attraction, social attraction, 양자관계, 조절초점부합, 조절초점이론, 향상조절초점, 예방조절초점, 과제요구, 공동수행 상대 선택, 대인매력, 사회매력

참고문헌

1.

강혜자?한덕웅(2005).자기차이에 따른 우울과 불안의 경험.한국심리학회지:건강,10(3),349-374.

2.

나영심?한덕웅(2005).자기지침과 조절초점의 불일치가 자기정서에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 건강, 10(4),431-453.

3.

표승연?한덕웅(2010).이성관계에서 관계만족과 결별의도를 설명하는 심리요인들.연차학술발표대회 논문집,

4.

한덕웅(2004).인간의 동기심리.박영사.

5.

한덕웅?황소정(1999).집단수행 상황에서 유사성-매력가설의 검증.한국심리학회지:사회 및 성격,13, 255-275.

6.

허태균(2001).사후가정사고의 활성화에서 조절적 동기의 역할.한국심리학회지:사회 및 성격,15(2),159-171.

7.

Byrne, D. (1961). Interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,62,713-715.

8.

Camacho, C. J., Higgins, E. T., & Luger, L. (2003). Moralvalue transfer from regulatory fit : What feels rightis rightand what feels wrong is wrong. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,84(3),498-510.

9.

Cesario, J., Grant, H., & Higgins, E. T.(2004). Regulatory Fit and Persuasion: Transfer from "Feeling Right". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,86(3),388-404.

10.

Coolsen, M. K.(2003). A self-regulatory focus model of couple well-being. A dissertation of the University of north Carolina at Chapel Hill for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

11.

Crowe, E., & Higgins, E. T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,69,117-132.

12.

Evans, L. M., & Petty, R. E. (2003). Self-guide framing and persuasion: Responsibly increasing message processing to ideallevels. Personality and Social Psychology Bulleine,29,313-324.

13.

Freitas, A. L., & Higgins, E. T. (2002). Enjoying goal-directed actions: The role of regulatory fit. Psychologial Science,13(1),1-6.

14.

Freitas, A. L., Liberman, N., & Higgins, E. T. (2002). Regulatory fit and resisting temptation during goal pursuit. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,38,291-298.

15.

Grant, H., & Higgins, E. T. (1997). Are positive or negative messages more persuasive?: Regulatory focus as moderator. Unpublished manuscript, Columbia University.

16.

Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review,94,319-340.

17.

Higgins, E. T.(1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist,52,1280-1300.

18.

Higgins, E. T.(1998).Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In M. P,, Zanna(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology(Vol.30, pp.1-46).SanDiego,CA:Academic Press.

19.

Higgins, E. T.(2000b). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist,55,1217-1230.

20.

Higgins, E. T.,Idson, L. C., Freitas, A. L., Spiegel, S., & Molden, D. C. (2003). Transfer of value from fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,84(6),1140-1153.

21.

Higgins, E. T.,Shah, J., & Friedman, R. (1997). Emotional responses to goal attainment: Strength of regulatory focus as moderator.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,72,515-525.

22.

Idson, L. C., Liberman, N.,& Higgins, E. T. (2004). Imagining how you'd feel: The role of motivational experiences from regulatory fit. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,30, 926-937.

23.

Lee, A. Y., & Aaker, J. L. (2004). Bringing the frame into focus: The influence of regulatory fiton processing fluency and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,86,205-218.

24.

Plaks, J. E., & Higgins, E. T. (2000). Pragmaticuse of stereotyping in teamwork: Social loafing and compensation as function of inferred pertner-situation fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6),962-974.

25.

Spigel, S., Grant, H., & Higgins, E. T. (2004). How regulatory fit enhances motivational strength during goal pursuit.European Journal of Social Psychology,34,39-54.

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격

논문 투고 OA 정책