團體合作的情境對人們工作表現的影響究竟是利抑或是弊？在以往的研究結果大多支持團體合作對人們具有不良的影響，亦即個人在團體中工作會產生偷懶的行為，而且隨著團體愈大，個人的努力程度會愈趨下降，社會心理學家稱之為「社會閒散」現象。然而 Williams 與 Karau（1991）卻發現當工作意義度高且預期到同伴的表現不佳時，團體合作的情境反而會有正面的影響，亦即此時人們會因為重視團體的表現反而較單獨一人時更加努力工作，以彌補同組夥伴表現的不足，故Williams 等人稱之為「社會彌補」現象。此兩種現象均可能發生於團體合作的情境下，但社會彌補現象對組織而言是最有利的，因此若能更進一步地瞭解，則當能有助於組織人力資源的管理及提高組織的生產力。故本研究的目的主要在於以初探的角度，來探討除 Williams 等人所提的條件外，是否存在其他可能的因素會影響社會彌補現象的發生，並再次驗證社會閒散的現象。現象對組織而言是最有利的，因此若能更進一步地瞭解，則當能有助於組織人力資源

的管理及提高組織的生產力。故本研究的目的主要在於以初探的角度，來探討除 Williams 等人所提的條件外，是否存在其他可能的因素會影響社會彌補現象的發生，並再次驗證社會閒散的現象。 本研究採實驗室實驗法，以 180 位大學部同學為受試，並將實驗情境控制在中等意義度的情況下，操弄四個自變項：（1）工作情境（團體組、個別組）；（2）知覺低能力同伴（有、無）；（3）人際親疏度（親密、疏遠）；（4）團體滲透性（高、低）。但因知覺低能力同伴、人際親疏度及團體滲性均無法在個別組中操弄，故本研究採用不完全受試者間實驗設計（2 x 2 x 2 +1），來分析各組受試在腦力激盪作業上的表現。本研究結果發現不論知覺低能力同伴與否、人際關係親疏及團體滲透性高低，團體組的受試者在從事腦力激盪這種勞心性的作業時，與個別組的受試者在工作表現上並無顯著的差異，亦即並未發現所有自變項的主要效果及交互作用，也未能證

實驗社會彌補及社會閒散現象。最後研究者針對上述的結果探討可能發生的原因，並檢討研究的限制及提出未來研究的建議。

Most of previous research had supported the social loafing

phenomenon, which suggested that people will tend to spend less effort when working collectively than working alone. However, Williams and Karau (1991) suggested people will work harder collectively than alone when they expect their co-workers to perform poorly on a meaningful task, which they named "social compensation". In thispresent study we try to eximine this two phenomenon via people work either collectively or alone on a medium meaningful task ( brainstorming task ). Subjects were 74 male and 106 female collage students. The results show that neither consciousness of low ability co-worker ( feedback, non-

feedback ), group relationships ( roommate, stranger ) nor group permeability ( open, close ) is associated with subject's performance when they work collectively. In addition,the performance of collective group is the same as alone group (basic contrastgroup ). In other words, the results fail to support either social loafing orsocial compensation phenomenon. Ss' performance has no significant differenceamong nine experiment conditions. Discussion and suggestions are included.

一﹒中文部分
王榮春。 (民83)。 人際親疏與目標設定對團體中個人工作及團體工作努力分配的影響。 國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
朱令娟。 (民.77)。 酬賞型態、角色重要性及工作變異性對社會閒散之影響。 國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
吳秀美。 (民84)。 社會開散或社會補償:勞力辯正的作用。 私立中原大學心理學研究所碩士論文。
吳靜吉、高泉豐、王敬仁、丁興祥。(民70)。 拓弄思語文創造思考測驗(乙式)指導及研究手冊。 台北市，遠流出版社。
李美枝(1993 )。從有關公平判斷的研究結果看中國人之人己關係的界限。 本土心理學研究， 1, 267-300 。
林幸台、王木榮。 (民76)。 威廉斯創造力測驗指導手冊。 台北市，心理出版社。
用佩芬。 (民83)。 人際親疏度及工作次數對團體中個人工作表現的影響。 國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
張國義、陳皎眉。 (民84) 。不同的激勵策略對社會閒散之影響。中華心理學刊， 37(1) , 71-81 。
許正聖。(民83)。 中國人的內團體偏私行為?從「關係」角度探討社會認同理論。 國立政治大學心理研究所
碩士論文。
陳品華。 (民.82)。 人際親疏度，情境後果對差序性反應的影響?以公正知覺為例。 國立政治大學心理研究所
碩士論文。
程懷琳。(民77) 。工作類型、工作能力及酬賞分配方式對團體中個人玉作表現的影響。 國立政治大學心理研
究所碩士論文。
費孝通。 (1974) 。差序格局。 見費孝通著:鄉土中國，頁22-30 。上海:觀察社。
黃光國(1985)。 人情與面子:中國人的權力遊戲。 見楊國書主編:中國人的心理，頁289-318 。台北:桂冠圖書公司。
黃光國。 (民80) 。中國人的權力遊戲。 台北市:巨流圖書公司。
黃靜怡。 (民83)。 團體成員間的關係及個人動機對社會因境中合作行為的影響。 國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
楊國樞(1993)。 中國人的社會取向:社會互動的觀點。見楊國樞、余安邦主編:中國人的心理與社會心理
念及方法篇(一九九二) ，頁87-142 。台北:桂冠圖書公司。
鄭美芳。(民77) 。社會助長與社會閒散之比較研究。 國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
二、英文部分
Allport, F.R. (1920). The influence of the group upon association and thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 3, 159 - 182 .
Baron, R.S. (1986). Distraction-conflict theory: Progress
and problems. Advances in Experiemntal Social Psychology,
12, 1-40.
Bartis, S., Harkins, S.G., & Szymanski, K. (1988).
Evaluation and performance: A two-edged knife. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14(2),242-251.
Brickner, M.A., Harkins, S.G., & Ostrom, T.M. (1986).
Effects of Personal involvement: Thought-provoking
implications for social loafing. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 51, 763-769.
Burwitz, L., & Newell, K.M. (1972). The effects of the
mere presence of co actors on learning a motor skill.
Journal of Motor Behavior, 4, 99-102.
Cannent, D. W. (1970). Rate of simple moter responding
as a function of coaction, competition, and sex the participants. PsychollOlnic Science, 12, 340-341.
Clark, M.S. (1981). Noncompariability of benefits gjven
and received: A cue to the existence of friendship. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 44, 375-381.
Clark, M. S. (1984). Reocrd keeping in two types fo relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
47, 549-557.
Clark, M. S., & Mills, J. (1979). Interpersonal attraction
· In exchange and communal relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 12-24.
Clark, M.S., Powell, M.C., & Mills, J. (1986). Keeping
track of needs in communal exchange relationships.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, g,333-338.
Clark, M.S., Quellette, R., Powell, M.C., & Milberg, S.
(1987). Recipient's mood, relationship type, and helping.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53,94-103.
Cottrell, N.B. (1972). Social facilitation. In C.G.
McClintock (Ed.), Experimental Social Psychology.
New York: Holt.
Dashiell, J.F. (1930). An experiemntal analysis of some
group effects. Joural of Abnormal and Social Psychology,
25, 190-199.
Deaux, K., & Major, B. (1987). Putting gender into context:
An interactive model of gender-related behavior.
Psycholo gical Review, 94-3, 369-389.
Ellemers, N., Van Knippenberg, A., & Wilke, H. (1990).
· The influence of permeability of group boundaries and
stability of group status on strategies of individual mobility and social change. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 233-246.
Ellemers, N., Van Knippenberg, A., de Vries, N.K., &
Wilke, H. (1988). Social identification and permeability
of group boundaries. European Journal of Social
Psychology,18, 497-513.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison process.
Human Relations, 7, 117 -140.
Goethals, G., & Darley, J. (1987). Social companson
theory: Self-evaluation and group life. In B. Mullen &
G.R. Geothals(Eds.), Theories of group behavior (pp.
21-47). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Harcum, E.R., & Badura, L.L. (1990). Social Loafing as a
response to an appraisal of appropriate effort. Journal
of Psychology, 124,629-637.
Harkins, S.G., & - Jackson, J.M. (1985). The role of
evaluation in eliminating social loafing. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11, 575-584.
Harkins, S.G., & Petty, R. E. (1982). Effects of task difficult and task uniqueness on social loafing. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology:, 43, 1214-1229.
Harkins, S.G., & Szymanski, K. (1988). Scialloafing and
self-evaluation with an objective standard. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 354-365.
Harkins, S.G., & Szymanski, K. (1989) . Social loafing
group evaluation . Journal of Personality: and Social
Psychology, 56, 934-941.
Harkins, S.G., Latane', B., & Williams, K. (1980). Social
loafing: allocating effort or taking it easy? Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology:, lQ(5), 457 -465.
Heckhausen, H. (1977). Achievement motivation and its '
constructs: A cognitive model. Motivation and Emotion,
1, 283-329.
Holmes, J.G., & Rempel, J.K. (1989) .. Trust in close relationships. In C.Hendrick (Ed .), Close relationships
(pp. 187-220). Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
Hui, C.H., & Triandis, H.C. (1991). Cultural differences
in reward allocation: Is collectivism the explanation?
· British Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 145-157.
Inglham, A.G., Levinger, G., Graves, J., & Peckham, V.
(1974). Theringelmann effect:_ Studies of group size
and group performance. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 10, 371-384.
Jackson, J.M., & Williams, K.D. (1985). Social loafing
on difficult tasks: Working collectively can improve
performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
49, 937-942.
Kerr, N.L., & Bruun, S. (1981) . ringelmann revisited: Alternative explanations for the social loafing effect.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
7, 224-231.
Kerr, N.L., & Bruun, S.E. (1983). Dispensability ofmember
effort and group motivation losses: free-rider effects.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1),78-94.
Kravitz, D. A., & Martin, B. (1986). Ringelmann rediscovered: The original article. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 50, 936-941.
Latane', B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many
hands make light the work: The causes and consequences
of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 822-832.
Li, M.e. (1992). The effect of group identuty on reaction
to injustice as a ffunction of individualism and collectivism. Unpulished doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania
State University.
Markus, H. (1978) .. The effect of mere presence on social
facilitation: An unobtrusive test. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology,14, 389-397.
Marten, R., & Landers, D.M. (1972). Evaluation potential
as a determinant of coaction effects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 8, 347-359.
Meumann, E. (1904). Haus-und schularbeit: experimente
an kindern der volkschule. Die Deutsche Schule, 8,
278-303.
Pessin, J. (1933). The compatative effects of social and
mechanical stimulation on memorizing. American Journal of Psychology, 45, 263-270.
Petty, R., Harkins, S., Williams, K., & Latane' B. (1977).
The effects of group size on cognitive effort and evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
3, 579-582.
Sanna, L.I. (1992). Self-efficacy theory: Implications for
social facilitation and social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(5), 774-786.
Shepperd, I.A. & Wright, R.A. (1989). Individual contributions to a collective effort: An incentive analysis.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, D.,141-149.
Sholar, W.A., & Clark, M.S. (1982). Deciding in communal
and exchange relationships: By consensus or
should majority rile? Paper presented in a symposium
on "Communal and Exchange Relationship", Clark, M.S. (Chair), Meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, Baltinl0re, MD.
Snyder, M., & Ickes, W. (1985). Personality and social
behavior. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook
of social psychology (Vol 2, 3rd ed., pp.883· -947) . New
York: Random House.
Szymanski, K. , & Harkins, S.G. (1987). Social loafing
and self-evaluation woth a social standard. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 891-897.
Tajfel, H. & Turner, J.C. (1978). An integrative theory
of intergroup conflict. In W.G. Austin & Worchel
(Eds), The social psychology of intergroup relations
(pp.33-47) . Montercy, CA:Brooks/Cole.
Tajfel, H. & Turner, J.C. (1985). The social identity theory
of intergroup behavior. IN S. Worchel & W.G.
Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (2nd
ed.,). Chicago: Neison-Hall.
Tajfel, H. (1975). The exit of social mobility and the
voice of social change. Social Science Information,
14, 101-118 .
Tajfel, H. (1978a). Interindividual behavior and intergroup
behavior. In H. Tajfel (Ed.). Differentiation between
social groups. New York: Academic Press.
Tajfel, H. (1978b). Social categorization, social identity,
and social companson. In H. Tajfel (Ed.).
Differentiation between social groups . New York:
Academic Press.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J.C. (1986). The social identity theory
of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W.G.
Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup relations (2nd
ed., pp.7-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Travis, L.E. (1925). The effect of small audience upon
hand-eye coordination. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 20, 142-146.
Travis, L.E. (1928). The influence of the group upon the
stuterer's speed in free association. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 23, 45-51.
Triandis, H. (1989). The self and social behavior in different
culture contexts. Psychological Review, 96,506-520.
Triandis, H.C., Bontempo, R., & Villareal, M.l (1988).
Individualism and collectivism: Cross-cultural perspectives
in self-ingroup relationship. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology,54，323-338.
Triplett, N. (1897). The dynamogenic factors In
pacemaking and competition. American Journal of
Psychology, 9, 507-533.
Vroom, V.H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York:
Wiley.
Waddell, B.A., & Clark, M.S. (1982). Feelings of exp;oitation
in communal and exchange relationship. Paper
presented in a symposiulll on "Communal and Exchange
Relationships", Clark, M.S. (Chair), Meeting
of the Eastern Psychological Association, Baltimore,
MD.
Weston, S.B., & English, H.B. (1926). The influence of
the group on psychological test scores. American
Journal of Psychology, 37, 600-601.
Williams, K.D., & Karau, S.J. (1991). Social loafing and
social compensation: The effects of expectations of coworker
performance . Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 21, 571-581.
Williamson, G.M., & Clark, M.S. (1989). Providing help
and desired relationship type as determinants of
changes in moods and self-evaluations. Journal of
· Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 722-734.
Williams, K., Harkins, S., & Latane', B. (1981). Identifiability
as a deterrent to social loafing: Two cheering
experiments. Journal of personality and Social Psychology,
40, 303-311.
Williams, K.D. (1981, May). The effects of group cohensiveness
on social loafing. Paper presented at the Annual
Convention of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Detroit, MI.
Williamson, G.M., & Clark, M.S. (1992). Impact of desired
relationship type on affective reactions to choosing
abd being required to help. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 10-18.
Yamagishi, T. (1988). Exit from the group as an individualistic solution to the free rider problem in the United States and Japan. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 530-542.
Zajonc, R.B. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149,269-274.