返回Google圖書搜尋

The Relationship of Authoritarian-democratic Factors to Attitude Changes in Work Groups

出版	Department of Psychology. University of Kansas City, 1957
URL	http://books.google.com.hk/books?id=oWpMNwAACAAJ&hl=&source=gbs_api

註釋This swtudy was undertanken to examine the amount of attitude change under different methods of supervision and different supervisor personalities when matched with different worker personalities. Both the methods of supervision and personality of supervisor and worker were varied along the authoritarian-democratic continuum. The recognition of the autoritarian-democretic dimension as a factor in work group behavior is the result of much research. The literature suggests three variables which would provide a cross-section of this dimension of authoritarianism: 1) the personality of the supervisor, 2) the method of supervision as perceived by the group member, 3) the personalities of the group members. The authoritarian-democreatic personality dimension was measured by the use of the F-Scale for both the supervisors and group members. A questionnaire was constructed to determine the method of supervision used by each supervisor. The sample was comprised of seventeen work groups and their supervisors. The total size of the sample was 137 including the supervisors. Suppoervisors and group members were classified by their scores on the F-Scale and the supervisory methods questionnaire with the median as the dividing point. Those above the median were classified as authoritarian and those below as democreatic. In this way, six different types of groups developed as each group differed in regard to the three variables along the authoritarian-democratic dimension. 1. Democratic Supervisor-democratic method-democratic group 2. Democratic supervisor-democratic method-authoritarian group 3. Democratic supervisor-authoritarian method-democratic group 4. Authoritarian supervisor-democratic method-authoritarian group 5. Authoritarian supervisor-democratic method-democratic group 6. Authoritarian supervisor-authoritarian method-democratic group. The other who types theoretically possible, Democratic supervisor-authoritarian method-authoritarian group and Authoritarian supervisor-authoritarian method-authoritarian group, did not show up under the techniques used. A merit rating scale was introduced to both supervisors and group members following the administration of the F-Scale and the supervisory methods questionnaire. The individuals were asked to indicate their attitude toward such a merit rating system. They were then asked to study and discuss the merit rating scale during a three week period. At the end of the period they were again asked to express their attitudes toward the rating system. Attitude change was deduced by the difference in the pre-test and post-test attitude scores toward the merit rating scale. By the use of the t-test, significant differences in the amount of mean change (favorable) in attitudes towards the merit rating scale were found for groups designated primarily democratic in personality make-up with supervisors who were also democratic personalities. Perceived supervisory method was not a significant variable, as such. However, it was shown that individuals who perceive the method of supervision as being consistent with their own personality show a significant (favorable) change in attitude as opposed to those who view the supervisory method as the opposite of their personalities. Both of these findings were significant at the five per cent level of confidence. The interpretation of the results suggests the conclusion that it is the interpersonal relationship between supervisor and the individual group member which is important in leadership rather than the supervisory methods designed to handle groups as a whole. It is apparent that the democratic supervisor is more effective in using this individualistic method of approach.