感知到的社会支持对个人主义/集体主义员工寻求支持的影响

Merve Acikdeniz, Yong Wah Goh, Pei Shan Goh, Yayoi Watanabe, Ikuko Noro, Rong Wang, Jiang Jiang, Agota Kun, Lohsnah Jeevanandam
{"title":"感知到的社会支持对个人主义/集体主义员工寻求支持的影响","authors":"Merve Acikdeniz, Yong Wah Goh, Pei Shan Goh, Yayoi Watanabe, Ikuko Noro, Rong Wang, Jiang Jiang, Agota Kun, Lohsnah Jeevanandam","doi":"10.1177/14705958241237735","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Greater perceived social support may influence an individual’s appraisals of their stressful situation, negative affect, and subsequent support seeking coping. An individual’s identification with the individualism-collectivism dimensions could also influence this process. We conducted structural equation modelling (AMOS) on archival data from two groups of adult workers from five countries, who were categorised by their scores on the individualism-collectivism dimensions: a highly individualistic group ( n = 424), and a highly collectivistic group ( n = 400). The analysis aimed to determine how levels of perceived support influenced appraisals of stress and negative affect experiences leading to the use of social support seeking for both groups. The process models representing the individualistic and collectivistic groups were compared to see whether stronger identification with individualism or collectivism resulted in a similar or different stress process. Although the conceptual models fit both groups similarly overall, there were differences between the groups regarding the indirect paths involved in the model, particularly relating to the influence of perceived support on appraisals of the threat of the stressor. Implications and applications of the findings are discussed.","PeriodicalId":46626,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cross Cultural Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The influence of perceived social support on support seeking across individualistic/collectivistic employees\",\"authors\":\"Merve Acikdeniz, Yong Wah Goh, Pei Shan Goh, Yayoi Watanabe, Ikuko Noro, Rong Wang, Jiang Jiang, Agota Kun, Lohsnah Jeevanandam\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14705958241237735\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Greater perceived social support may influence an individual’s appraisals of their stressful situation, negative affect, and subsequent support seeking coping. An individual’s identification with the individualism-collectivism dimensions could also influence this process. We conducted structural equation modelling (AMOS) on archival data from two groups of adult workers from five countries, who were categorised by their scores on the individualism-collectivism dimensions: a highly individualistic group ( n = 424), and a highly collectivistic group ( n = 400). The analysis aimed to determine how levels of perceived support influenced appraisals of stress and negative affect experiences leading to the use of social support seeking for both groups. The process models representing the individualistic and collectivistic groups were compared to see whether stronger identification with individualism or collectivism resulted in a similar or different stress process. Although the conceptual models fit both groups similarly overall, there were differences between the groups regarding the indirect paths involved in the model, particularly relating to the influence of perceived support on appraisals of the threat of the stressor. Implications and applications of the findings are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46626,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Cross Cultural Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Cross Cultural Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14705958241237735\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Cross Cultural Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14705958241237735","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

感知到的更多社会支持可能会影响个人对其压力状况的评价、负面影响以及随后寻求支持的应对方式。个人对个人主义-集体主义维度的认同也会影响这一过程。我们对来自五个国家的两组成年工人的档案数据进行了结构方程建模(AMOS),这些数据按个人主义-集体主义维度的得分进行了分类:高度个人主义组(n = 424)和高度集体主义组(n = 400)。分析的目的是确定感知到的支持水平如何影响两组人对压力和负面情绪体验的评价,从而导致他们寻求社会支持。我们对代表个人主义和集体主义群体的过程模型进行了比较,以了解对个人主义或集体主义的更强认同是否会导致相似或不同的压力过程。虽然概念模型总体上与两个群体的情况相似,但在模型所涉及的间接路径方面,尤其是在感知到的支持对压力源威胁评估的影响方面,两个群体之间存在差异。本文讨论了研究结果的意义和应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The influence of perceived social support on support seeking across individualistic/collectivistic employees
Greater perceived social support may influence an individual’s appraisals of their stressful situation, negative affect, and subsequent support seeking coping. An individual’s identification with the individualism-collectivism dimensions could also influence this process. We conducted structural equation modelling (AMOS) on archival data from two groups of adult workers from five countries, who were categorised by their scores on the individualism-collectivism dimensions: a highly individualistic group ( n = 424), and a highly collectivistic group ( n = 400). The analysis aimed to determine how levels of perceived support influenced appraisals of stress and negative affect experiences leading to the use of social support seeking for both groups. The process models representing the individualistic and collectivistic groups were compared to see whether stronger identification with individualism or collectivism resulted in a similar or different stress process. Although the conceptual models fit both groups similarly overall, there were differences between the groups regarding the indirect paths involved in the model, particularly relating to the influence of perceived support on appraisals of the threat of the stressor. Implications and applications of the findings are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Cross Cultural Management is an international peer reviewed journal that publishes the highest quality original research in cross cultural aspects of management, work and organization. The International Journal of Cross Cultural Management (IJCCM) aims to provide a specialized academic medium and main reference for the encouragement and dissemination of research on cross cultural aspects of management, work and organization. This includes both original qualitative and quantitative empirical work as well as theoretical and conceptual work which adds to the understanding of management across cultures.
期刊最新文献
A conceptual model of authentic leadership in cross-cultural context Negative sentiment – a rhetorical device to reconstruct relationships of power (between tribal-ancient and new populist leadership) Are individualistic employees tolerant of the benefit of others? A multilevel analysis of the relationship between witnessing coworkers i-deals and malicious envy The impact of studying abroad in a socioeconomically different country on work related values: Evidence from cypriot workers who were educated in the UK How cultural intelligence facilitates employee creativity: The roles of intercultural citizenship behavior and perceived disharmony
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1