领导者的榜样及追随者的人格对合作水平的影响

发布时间：2018-05-04 18:37

本文选题：榜样式领导 + 公共物品游戏　；参考：《浙江理工大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：研究目的:在重复性公共物品游戏范式的基础上加入榜样式领导,观察领导者不同水平的榜样行为对追随者合作水平的影响情况以及变化趋势,以及不同人格特点的追随者是否会对其合作水平产生影响。研究方法:包括两个部分,第一部分采用重复性公共物品游戏范式,利用Z-tree软件重新编程,将被试分为控制组、高榜样领导组、中榜样领导组和低榜样领导组4组,分别观察他(她)们不同水平的榜样对追随者的合作水平的影响;第二部分采用问卷研究的方法,进一步分析信任倾向、风险偏好和马基雅维利人格是否会成为影响追随者的合作水平的因素。研究结果:第一,不同合作水平的领导者对团队的榜样作用不同,领导者的合作水平越高,其追随者的合作水平也越高;但是在平均合作水平方面,和无领导组相比,无论合作水平为高、中还是低,榜样式领导者均没有明显提高追随者之间的合作水平。第二,在合作水平的整体趋势方面,高、中领导组和控制组的追随者的合作水平均随回合数的增加而逐渐下降,而低领导组追随者的合作水平虽然在第二个回合即迅速下降,但之后始终保持相对稳定的水平。第三,收益方面,在三个领导组中,仅低领导组的领导者的收益高于其追随者,而高领导组和中领导组的领导者收益均低于追随者;高合作水平的领导者能显著提高团队的整体收益。第四,高信任倾向的被试的合作水平低于低信任倾向者;风险倾向越大,追随者的贡献水平越高;马基雅维利人格与合作水平无显著相关。第五,OLS回归模型表明,低领导组的追随者比控制组的被试平均少贡献4.15个代币(p0.01)。和非参数检验的结果类似,高风险偏好的被试贡献的代币更多(p0.01),高信任倾向者比低信任倾向者平均少贡献1.43个代币(p=0.09),马基雅维利人格对合作水平的影响不显著。研究结论:第一,高合作水平的领导者自身的高合作性对团队的整体合作水平、整体收益均有利。第二,和没有领导者的团队相比,低合作水平的领导者不利于追随者、整个团队的合作,但受到追随者利他性因素的影响,他们之间的合作并不会立即完全崩溃。第三,当领导者合作水平为高或中等时,追随者的合作水平低于领导者,收益高于领导者,即追随者为搭便车者;而当领导者合作水平为低时,追随者的合作水平高于领导者,收益则低于领导者,即领导者为搭便车者。第四,榜样式领导的作用并非立竿见影,其具有一定的延迟性和持续性特点,一旦产生,将在一段时间内影响人们的合作和收益。第五,高风险偏好的被试的合作水平更高;信任倾向、马基雅维利人格不是影响合作水平的有效指标。
[Abstract]:The purpose of this study was to observe the influence of leaders' different levels of role models on the level of cooperation among their followers and their changing trends, based on the repetitive public goods game paradigm. And whether followers with different personality traits have an impact on their level of cooperation. Methods: the study included two parts. In the first part, the subjects were reprogrammed with Z-tree software using repetitive public goods game paradigm. The subjects were divided into four groups: control group, high role model leadership group, middle role model leadership group and low role model leadership group. The influence of their different levels of role models on the level of cooperation among their followers was observed. In the second part, a questionnaire study was used to further analyze the tendency of trust. Risk preference and Machiavelli personality are factors that influence the cooperation level of followers. The results showed that: first, leaders with different levels of cooperation had different role models for teams. The higher the level of cooperation of leaders, the higher the level of cooperation among their followers; however, the average level of cooperation was higher than that of non-leaders. No matter the level of cooperation is high, medium or low, model leaders have not significantly improved the level of cooperation among their followers. Second, in terms of the overall trend of cooperation, the level of cooperation between followers of the middle and middle leadership groups and the control group decreased gradually with the increase of the number of rounds, while the level of cooperation of the followers of the lower leadership groups declined rapidly in the second round. But the level has remained relatively stable since then. Third, in the three leading groups, the leaders of the low leadership group are higher than their followers, while the leaders of the high leadership group and the middle leadership group are lower than their followers; A leader with a high level of cooperation can significantly improve the overall revenue of the team. Fourth, the cooperation level of the subjects with high trust tendency was lower than that of the low trust tendency; the greater the risk tendency, the higher the contribution level of followers; Machiavelli personality had no significant correlation with the cooperation level. The fifth OLS regression model showed that the followers of the low leadership group contributed an average of 4.15 tokens (P 0.01) less than those of the control group. Similar to the results of non-parametric test, the subjects with high risk preference contributed more tokens than those with high risk preference, and those with high trust tendency contributed 1.43 less tokens than those with low trust propensity. Machiavelli personality had no significant effect on the level of cooperation. The conclusions are as follows: first, the high level of cooperation is beneficial to the overall level of cooperation and the overall income of the team. Second, compared with teams without leaders, leaders with low level of cooperation are not conducive to followers, the whole team cooperation, but affected by the altruistic factors of followers, the cooperation between them will not collapse completely immediately. Third, when the leader's cooperation level is high or medium, the follower's cooperation level is lower than the leader's, the benefit is higher than the leader's, that is, the follower is a hitchhiker, but when the leader's cooperation level is low, the follower's cooperation level is higher than the leader's. The return is lower than the leader, that is, the leader is a hitchhiker. Fourth, the role of exemplary leadership is not immediate, it has a certain delay and sustainability characteristics, once produced, will affect people's cooperation and benefits for a period of time. Fifth, the participants with high risk preference had a higher level of cooperation, and Machiavelli personality was not an effective indicator of the level of cooperation.
【学位授予单位】：浙江理工大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：B848

【相似文献】