13 research outputs found

    Thai conceptualizations of forgiveness within a work context : comparison with Western models

    Get PDF
    Forgiveness research has focused almost exclusively on individualistic Western culture despite acknowledgement of the importance of cultural factors. Conflict at work is common yet studies of forgiveness in work contexts are rare, as are qualitative studies. Addressing these short-comings, this study examines the forgiveness process as experienced by Thai nurses in a hospital within a collectivist culture heavily influenced by Buddhism. Thirty nurses were interviewed about a situation at work where the need for forgiveness arose. Qualitative methods were used to identify participants' cognitions, emotions, and behaviors in relation to the offensive event. Definitions of forgiveness were also elicited. Four continuous stages of the forgiveness process emerged: an experiencing stage, re-attribution stage, forgiveness stage, and behavioral stage. There were similarities with Western individualistic models but also some important differences related to Buddhism and Thai culture. Five dimensions of forgiveness emerged from the Thai definitions: overcoming negative approaches towards the offender, abandonment of negative judgment, fostering of positive approaches and loving-kindness towards the offender, awareness of the benefits of forgiveness, and forgiveness as incorporated within Buddhist beliefs. The results highlight the need to consider cultural influences when examining concepts like forgiveness

    āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāđƒāļ™āđ€āļ”āđ‡āļāđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļĒāļēāļ§āļŠāļ™ (Morality in Children and Adolescents)

    Get PDF
              This paper provides readers a wide perspective of morality studies which includes the meanings, theories, moral development in children and adolescents, related research, and the development of children and adolescents' morality.Keywords: morality, theory, development, child, adolescent āļšāļ—āļ„āļąāļ”āļĒāđˆāļ­           āđƒāļ™āļšāļ—āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ™āļĩāđ‰āļˆāļ°āđƒāļŦāđ‰āļ āļēāļžāļāļ§āđ‰āļēāļ‡āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāđ€āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āđ‚āļ”āļĒāļāļĨāđˆāļēāļ§āļ–āļķāļ‡āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ„āļļāļ“āļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āļ—āļĪāļĐāļŽāļĩāļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļ‡ āļžāļąāļ’āļ™āļēāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āđ€āļ”āđ‡āļāđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļĒāļēāļ§āļŠāļ™ āļ‡āļēāļ™āļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒāļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļ‡āļāļąāļšāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āđāļĨāļ°āļāļēāļĢāļžāļąāļ’āļ™āļēāļ„āļļāļ“āļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāđƒāļ™āđ€āļ”āđ‡āļāđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļĒāļēāļ§āļŠāļ™ āļ„āļģāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļ: āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āļ—āļĪāļĐāļŽāļĩ āļžāļąāļ’āļ™āļēāļāļēāļĢ āđ€āļ”āđ‡āļ āđ€āļĒāļēāļ§āļŠ

    āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāđƒāļ™āđ€āļ”āđ‡āļāđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļĒāļēāļ§āļŠāļ™

    Get PDF
    This paper provides readers a wide perspective of morality studies which includes the meanings, theories, moral development in children and adolescents, related research, and the development of children and adolescents’ morality.Keywords:morality, theory, development, child, adolescent āļšāļ—āļ„āļąāļ”āļĒāđˆāļ­āđƒāļ™āļšāļ—āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ™āļĩāđ‰āļˆāļ°āđƒāļŦāđ‰āļ āļēāļžāļāļ§āđ‰āļēāļ‡āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāđ€āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āđ‚āļ”āļĒāļāļĨāđˆāļēāļ§āļ–āļķāļ‡āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ„āļļāļ“āļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āļ—āļĪāļĐāļŽāļĩāļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļ‡ āļžāļąāļ’āļ™āļēāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āđ€āļ”āđ‡āļāđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļĒāļēāļ§āļŠāļ™ āļ‡āļēāļ™āļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒāļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļ‡āļāļąāļšāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āđāļĨāļ°āļāļēāļĢāļžāļąāļ’āļ™āļēāļ„āļļāļ“āļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāđƒāļ™āđ€āļ”āđ‡āļāđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļĒāļēāļ§āļŠāļ™āļ„āļģāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļ: āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āļ—āļĪāļĐāļŽāļĩ āļžāļąāļ’āļ™āļēāļāļēāļĢ āđ€āļ”āđ‡āļ āđ€āļĒāļēāļ§āļŠ

    āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļˆāļīāļ•āļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āđāļĨāļ°āļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄāļāļąāļšāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒāļĄāļđāļĨāļ™āļīāļ˜āļīāļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļ•āļąāļāļāļđāđƒāļ™āđ€āļ‚āļ•āļāļĢāļļāļ‡āđ€āļ—āļžāļĄāļŦāļēāļ™āļ„āļĢ (The Relations of Psychological Characteristics Social Situation and Work Efficiency of Rescue Volunteers from Ruamkatanyu Foundation in Bangkok)

    Get PDF
              The objectives of this study were to examine the relationship between Psychological characteristics social situations factors and psychological – situational characteristics to work efficiency of rescue volunteers, to rescue for important predictors of volunteers work efficiency, and to study the interactions between social support and attitude and between social support and rescue work self – efficacy on work efficiency. The participants were 293 rescue volunteers from Ruamkatanyu Foundation in Bangkok. There were three groups of independent variables; psychological characteristics (motivation in volunteers work and brammavihara. Social situation (social support from family, leaders, colleagues, and general people) psychological – situational characteristics (attitude towards volunteers work and rescue work self – efficacy. and dependent variables; work efficiency. Instruments were a 7 part questionnaire. The statistics used in this research were descriptive statistics Pearson product moment correlation, stepwise multiple regression Analysis, and two – way ANOVA.          The results were as follows:           1) Rescue work self – efficacy, attitude towards volunteers work, social support were positively desolated to work efficiency of rescue volunteers.           2) Rescue work self – efficacy together with attitude towards work, and motivation accounted for 22 % of the variance of work efficiency.           3) Rescue work self – efficacy together with social support from general people accounted for 27 % of the variance of work efficiency in elder group and 19 % in younger group.           4) Rescue work self – efficiency together with social support from leader accounted for 29 % of the variance of work efficiency in lighters collection group but only self – efficacy accounted for 18 % in rescue selection group.           5) Rescue work self – efficacy together with attitude and motivation accounted for 28 % of the variance of work efficiency in low work experience.           6) Interaction between social support from family and attitude, social support colleague and attitude, and social support from colleague and self – efficacy on work efficiency rescue were found. Key words: work efficiency, rescue volunteers, Ruamkatanyu Foundation āļšāļ—āļ„āļąāļ”āļĒāđˆāļ­          āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒāļ„āļĢāļąāđ‰āļ‡āļ™āļĩāđ‰āļĄāļĩāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļĄāļļāđˆāļ‡āļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļˆāļīāļ•āļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄ āļˆāļīāļ•āļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ•āļēāļĄāļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāļāļąāļšāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒ āđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ„āđ‰āļ™āļŦāļēāļ•āļąāļ§āļ—āļēāļ™āļēāļĒāļ—āļĩāđˆāļ”āļĩāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒāļˆāļēāļāļˆāļīāļ•āļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄ āđāļĨāļ°āļˆāļīāļ•āļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ•āļēāļĄāļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒ āļ—āļąāđ‰āļ‡āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĢāļ§āļĄāđāļĨāļ°āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒ āđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ›āļāļīāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄ āļˆāļīāļ•āļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ•āļēāļĄāļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāđāļĨāļ°āļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄāļāļąāļšāļˆāļīāļ•āļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ•āļēāļĄāļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒ āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļ•āđˆāļ­āļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒ āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ•āļąāļ§āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļ—āļĩāđˆāđƒāļŠāđ‰āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒ āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒāļĄāļđāļĨāļ™āļīāļ˜āļīāļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļ•āļąāļāļāļđ āļˆāļēāļ™āļ§āļ™ 293 āļ„āļ™ āļ•āļąāļ§āđāļ›āļĢāļ­āļīāļŠāļĢāļ°āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē āļĄāļĩ 3 āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄ āļ„āļ·āļ­ āļˆāļīāļ•āļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ° (āđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđāļĨāļ° āļžāļĢāļŦāļĄāļ§āļīāļŦāļēāļĢ 4) āļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄ (āļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄāļˆāļēāļāļ„āļĢāļ­āļšāļ„āļĢāļąāļ§ āļˆāļēāļāļŦāļąāļ§āļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāļˆāļļāļ” āļˆāļēāļāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ™āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļˆāļēāļāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļēāļŠāļ™) āđāļĨāļ°āļˆāļīāļ•āļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ•āļēāļĄāļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒ (āđ€āļˆāļ•āļ„āļ•āļīāļ•āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢ āđāļĨāļ°āļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢ) āļŠāļēāļŦāļĢāļąāļšāļ•āļąāļ§āđāļ›āļĢāļ•āļēāļĄ āđ„āļ”āđ‰āđāļāđˆ āļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđāļšāđˆāļ‡āļ­āļ­āļāđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™ āļāļēāļĢāļ›āļĢāļ°āđ€āļĄāļīāļ™āļŠāļ āļēāļžāļœāļđāđ‰āļšāļēāļ”āđ€āļˆāđ‡āļš āļāļēāļĢāļ›āļāļĄāļžāļĒāļēāļšāļēāļĨāļœāļđāđ‰āļšāļēāļ”āđ€āļˆāđ‡āļš āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļ„āļĨāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ™āļĒāđ‰āļēāļĒāđāļĨāļ°āļ™āļēāļŠāđˆāļ‡āļœāļđāđ‰āļšāļēāļ”āđ€āļˆāđ‡āļš āļŠāđˆāļ§āļ™āļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļĩāļ§āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄ āđāļšāđˆāļ‡āļ­āļ­āļāđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™ āļ­āļēāļĒāļļ āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē āļĢāļ°āļĒāļ°āđ€āļ§āļĨāļēāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ›āļāļīāļšāļąāļ•āļīāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđ€āļ„āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡āļĄāļ·āļ­āļ—āļĩāđˆāđƒāļŠāđ‰āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒāļ„āļĢāļąāđ‰āļ‡āļ™āļĩāđ‰ āđ„āļ”āđ‰āđāļāđˆ āđāļšāļšāļŠāļ­āļšāļ–āļēāļĄāļˆāļēāļ™āļ§āļ™ āļˆāļēāļ™āļ§āļ™ 1 āļŠāļļāļ” āđāļšāđˆāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™ 7 āļ‰āļšāļąāļš āļŠāļ–āļīāļ•āļīāļ—āļĩāđˆāđƒāļŠāđ‰āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļĄāļđāļĨ āđ„āļ”āđ‰āđāļāđˆ āļ„āđˆāļēāļŠāļąāļĄāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒāļŠāļŦāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āđ€āļžāļĩāļĒāļĢāđŒāļŠāļąāļ™ āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļ–āļ”āļ–āļ­āļĒāļžāļŦāļļāļ„āļđāļ“āđāļšāļšāļ‚āļąāđ‰āļ™āļ•āļ­āļ™ āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđāļ›āļĢāļ›āļĢāļ§āļ™āđāļšāļšāļŠāļ­āļ‡āļ—āļēāļ‡ āļœāļĨāļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒ āļžāļšāļ§āđˆāļē          1. āļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđ€āļˆāļ•āļ„āļ•āļīāļ•āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļžāļĢāļŦāļĄāļ§āļīāļŦāļēāļĢ 4 āđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄāļˆāļēāļāļ„āļĢāļ­āļšāļ„āļĢāļąāļ§ āļˆāļēāļāļŦāļąāļ§āļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāļˆāļļāļ” āļˆāļēāļāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ™āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™āđāļĨāļ°āļˆāļēāļāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļēāļŠāļ™āļĄāļĩāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāļ—āļēāļ‡āļšāļ§āļāļāļąāļšāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™          2. āļœāļĨāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāđ€āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡āļ›āļąāļˆāļˆāļąāļĒāļ—āļēāļ™āļēāļĒ āļžāļšāļ§āđˆāļē 1) āļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđ€āļˆāļ•āļ„āļ•āļīāļ•āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļąāļ™āļ­āļ˜āļīāļšāļēāļĒāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĒāļĨāļ° 22 āđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĢāļ§āļĄ 2) āļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄāļˆāļēāļāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļēāļŠāļ™ āļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļąāļ™āļ­āļ˜āļīāļšāļēāļĒāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĒāļĨāļ° 27 āđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ­āļēāļĒāļļāļĄāļēāļ 3) āļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđ€āļˆāļ•āļ„āļ•āļīāļ•āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļąāļ™āļ­āļ˜āļīāļšāļēāļĒāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĒāļĨāļ° 19 āđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ­āļēāļĒāļļāļ™āđ‰āļ­āļĒ 4) āļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļąāļ™āļ­āļ˜āļīāļšāļēāļĒāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĒāļĨāļ° 18 āđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ•āđˆāļē 5) āļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļˆāļēāļāļŦāļąāļ§āļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāļˆāļļāļ” āļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļąāļ™āļ­āļ˜āļīāļšāļēāļĒāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĒāļĨāļ° 29 āđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļŠāļđāļ‡ 6) āļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđ€āļˆāļ•āļ„āļ•āļīāļ•āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļąāļ™āļ­āļ˜āļīāļšāļēāļĒāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĒāļĨāļ° 28 āđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĢāļ°āļĒāļ°āđ€āļ§āļĨāļēāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ›āļāļīāļšāļąāļ•āļīāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ™āđ‰āļ­āļĒ          3. āļžāļšāļ›āļāļīāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄāļˆāļēāļāļ„āļĢāļ­āļšāļ„āļĢāļąāļ§ āļˆāļēāļāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ™āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™āļāļąāļšāđ€āļˆāļ•āļ„āļ•āļīāļ•āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āđāļĨāļ°āļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄāļˆāļēāļāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ™āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™āļāļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāļŠāđˆāļ‡āļœāļĨāļ•āđˆāļ­āļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒ          4. āđ„āļĄāđˆāļžāļšāļ›āļāļīāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄāļˆāļēāļāļŦāļąāļ§āļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāļˆāļļāļ” āļˆāļēāļāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļēāļŠāļ™āļāļąāļšāđ€āļˆāļ•āļ„āļ•āļīāļ•āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āđāļĨāļ°āļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄāļˆāļēāļāļ„āļĢāļ­āļšāļ„āļĢāļąāļ§ āļˆāļēāļāļŦāļąāļ§āļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāļˆāļļāļ” āļˆāļēāļāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļēāļŠāļ™āļāļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāļŠāđˆāļ‡āļœāļĨāļ•āđˆāļ­āļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒ āļ„āļģāļŠāļēāļ„āļąāļ: āļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļ āļēāļžāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™, āļ­āļēāļŠāļēāļŠāļĄāļąāļ„āļĢāļāļđāđ‰āļ āļąāļĒ, āļĄāļđāļĨāļ™āļīāļ˜āļīāļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļ•āļąāļāļāļđ &nbsp

    āļ›āļąāļˆāļˆāļąāļĒāļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨāļ•āđˆāļ­āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āđ€āļˆāđ‰āļēāļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļ—āļĻāļāļīāļˆāļŠāļąāļ‡āļāļąāļ”āļāļĢāļļāļ‡āđ€āļ—āļžāļĄāļŦāļēāļ™āļ„āļĢāļ āļēāļĒāđƒāļ•āđ‰āļĢāļ°āļšāļšāļāļēāļĢāļšāļĢāļīāļŦāļēāļĢāļˆāļąāļ”āļāļēāļĢāđāļ™āļ§āđƒāļŦāļĄāđˆāļ•āļēāļĄāļŦāļĨāļąāļāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļēāļ āļīāļšāļēāļĨ (Factors Affecting Work Behavior under the New Public Management System According to the Good Governance Principles ... )

    Get PDF
              The purpose of this study was to examine a causal  relation model of work behavior of city law enforcement officers at Bangkok Metropolitan  Administration  under  the  New  Public  Management System  concerning  good  governance. The sample consisted of 754 city law enforcement officers by multi-stage sampling; 368 government officers and 386 employees. Raw data collect by questionnaires. LISREL was used to analyze the data. The results revealed that The proposal model fit the empirical data. Most of path coefficients were statistically significant at 0.05 levels. For work behavior under the new public management system, the variables having positive and direct effects were attitude to work behavior, work role model and job satisfaction. In addition, attitude to work behavior played as mediating variable of the indirect effects from future orientation and self-control characteristics, moral reasoning, work role model and perceived patronage relations. All of these variables had positive effects except perceived patronage relations having negative direction. Perceived organizational justice also had positive and indirect effect on work behavior through job satisfaction. These variables accounted for 50 percent of the variance of work behavior.  For attitude to work behavior, the variables having positive and direct effects were future orientation and self-control characteristics, moral reasoning and work role model. Perceived patronage relations also had direct effect on the attitude but on the negative direction. Fifty-one percent variance of the attitude was explained by all these variables. For job satisfaction, there were only two variables having direct effects but in opposite directions; the effect of perceived organizational justice was positive whereas that of role conflict was negative. Eighty-one percent variance of job satisfaction was explained by these two variables.Keywords: work behavior, city law enforcement officers, good governance āļšāļ—āļ„āļąāļ”āļĒāđˆāļ­           āļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ™āļĩāđ‰āļĄāļĩāļ§āļąāļ•āļ–āļļāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļ‡āļ„āđŒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļžāļąāļ’āļ™āļēāđāļšāļšāļˆāļģāļĨāļ­āļ‡āđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļŠāļēāđ€āļŦāļ•āļļāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ āļēāļĒāđƒāļ•āđ‰āļĢāļ°āļšāļšāļāļēāļĢāļšāļĢāļīāļŦāļēāļĢāļˆāļąāļ”āļāļēāļĢāđāļ™āļ§āđƒāļŦāļĄāđˆāļ•āļēāļĄāļŦāļĨāļąāļāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļēāļ āļīāļšāļēāļĨ āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āđ€āļˆāđ‰āļēāļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļ—āļĻāļāļīāļˆāļŠāļąāļ‡āļāļąāļ”āļāļĢāļļāļ‡āđ€āļ—āļžāļĄāļŦāļēāļ™āļ„āļĢ āļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļ‚āđ‰āļēāļĢāļēāļŠāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļąāđ‰āļ‡āļŦāļĄāļ” 368 āļ„āļ™ āđāļĨāļ°āļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ›āļĢāļ°āļˆāļģāļ—āļąāđ‰āļ‡āļŦāļĄāļ” 386 āļ„āļ™ āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĄāļēāļˆāļēāļāļ§āļīāļ˜āļĩāļāļēāļĢāļŠāļļāđˆāļĄāļŦāļĨāļēāļĒāļ‚āļąāđ‰āļ™āļ•āļ­āļ™ āđƒāļŠāđ‰āđāļšāļšāļŠāļ­āļšāļ–āļēāļĄāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļāđ‡āļšāļĢāļ§āļšāļĢāļ§āļĄāļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļĄāļđāļĨ āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļĄāļđāļĨāđƒāļŠāđ‰āđ‚āļ›āļĢāđāļāļĢāļĄ LISREL āļœāļĨāļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒāļžāļšāļ§āđˆāļē āđāļšāļšāļˆāļģāļĨāļ­āļ‡āļ—āļĩāđˆāļœāļđāđ‰āļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒāļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āļ‚āļķāđ‰āļ™āļĄāļĩāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļ­āļ”āļ„āļĨāđ‰āļ­āļ‡āļāļąāļšāļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļĄāļđāļĨāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļ›āļĢāļ°āļˆāļąāļāļĐāđŒ āļœāļĨāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļ”āļŠāļ­āļšāđ€āļŠāđ‰āļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨ āļžāļšāļ§āđˆāļē āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāļąāļšāļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨāļ—āļēāļ‡āļšāļ§āļāđ‚āļ”āļĒāļ•āļĢāļ‡āļˆāļēāļāđ€āļˆāļ•āļ„āļ•āļī āļāļēāļĢāļĄāļĩāđāļšāļšāļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡ āđāļĨāļ°āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļžāļķāļ‡āļžāļ­āđƒāļˆ āđāļĨāļ°āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāļąāļšāļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨāļ—āļēāļ‡āļšāļ§āļāđ‚āļ”āļĒāļ­āđ‰āļ­āļĄāļˆāļēāļāļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļĄāļļāđˆāļ‡āļ­āļ™āļēāļ„āļ•āļ„āļ§āļšāļ„āļļāļĄāļ•āļ™ āđ€āļŦāļ•āļļāļœāļĨāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āļāļēāļĢāļĄāļĩāđāļšāļšāļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡ āđāļĨāļ°āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāļąāļšāļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨāļ—āļēāļ‡āļĨāļšāđ‚āļ”āļĒāļ­āđ‰āļ­āļĄāļˆāļēāļāļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāļĢāļ°āļšāļšāļ­āļļāļ›āļ–āļąāļĄāļ āđŒ āļœāđˆāļēāļ™āđ€āļˆāļ•āļ„āļ•āļī āđāļĨāļ°āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāļąāļšāļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨāļ—āļēāļ‡āļšāļ§āļāđ‚āļ”āļĒāļ­āđ‰āļ­āļĄāļˆāļēāļāļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļĒāļļāļ•āļīāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāđƒāļ™āļ­āļ‡āļ„āđŒāļāļēāļĢ āļœāđˆāļēāļ™āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļžāļķāļ‡āļžāļ­āđƒāļˆ āđ‚āļ”āļĒāļ•āļąāļ§āđāļ›āļĢāđ€āļŦāļĨāđˆāļēāļ™āļĩāđ‰āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļąāļ™āļ­āļ˜āļīāļšāļēāļĒāļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĒāļĨāļ° 50 āđāļĨāļ°āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāļąāļšāļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨāļ—āļēāļ‡āļĨāļšāđ‚āļ”āļĒāļ•āļĢāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāļĢāļ°āļšāļšāļ­āļļāļ›āļ–āļąāļĄāļ āđŒ āļ‹āļķāđˆāļ‡āļ•āļąāļ§āđāļ›āļĢāļ—āļąāđ‰āļ‡āļŦāļĄāļ”āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļąāļ™āļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ­āļ˜āļīāļšāļēāļĒāđ€āļˆāļ•āļ„āļ•āļīāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĒāļĨāļ° 51 āđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļˆāļ•āļ„āļ•āļīāļ•āđˆāļ­āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ āļēāļĒāđƒāļ•āđ‰āļĢāļ°āļšāļšāļāļēāļĢāļšāļĢāļīāļŦāļēāļĢāļˆāļąāļ”āļāļēāļĢāđāļ™āļ§āđƒāļŦāļĄāđˆāļ•āļēāļĄāļŦāļĨāļąāļāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļēāļ āļīāļšāļēāļĨ āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāļąāļšāļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨāļ—āļēāļ‡āļšāļ§āļāđ‚āļ”āļĒāļ•āļĢāļ‡āļˆāļēāļāļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļĄāļļāđˆāļ‡āļ­āļ™āļēāļ„āļ•āļ„āļ§āļšāļ„āļļāļĄāļ•āļ™ āđ€āļŦāļ•āļļāļœāļĨāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āļāļēāļĢāļĄāļĩāđāļšāļšāļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™  āļŠāđˆāļ§āļ™āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļžāļķāļ‡āļžāļ­āđƒāļˆāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāļąāļšāļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨāļ—āļēāļ‡āļšāļ§āļāđ‚āļ”āļĒāļ•āļĢāļ‡āļˆāļēāļāļāļēāļĢāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļĒāļļāļ•āļīāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāđƒāļ™āļ­āļ‡āļ„āđŒāļāļēāļĢ āđāļĨāļ°āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāļąāļšāļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨāļ—āļēāļ‡āļĨāļšāđ‚āļ”āļĒāļ•āļĢāļ‡āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ‚āļąāļ”āđāļĒāđ‰āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļšāļ—āļšāļēāļ— āļ‹āļķāđˆāļ‡āļ—āļąāđ‰āļ‡āļŠāļ­āļ‡āļ•āļąāļ§āđāļ›āļĢāļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļąāļ™āļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ­āļ˜āļīāļšāļēāļĒāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļžāļķāļ‡āļžāļ­āđƒāļˆāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĒāļĨāļ° 81 āļ„āļģāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļ: āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđ€āļˆāđ‰āļēāļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļ—āļĻāļāļīāļˆ   āļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļēāļ āļīāļšāļēāļĨ &nbsp

    āļ›āļąāļˆāļˆāļąāļĒāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļŠāļēāđ€āļŦāļ•āļļāļžāļŦāļļāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨāļ•āđˆāļ­āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļšāļļāļ„āļ„āļĨāđāļĨāļ°

    Get PDF
    This study was aimed to develop and test multilevel structural relationship models of individual and group factors affecting Innovative Work Behavior (IWB) in two levels, in which the outcome was an innovative product. The samples were members and leaders of work groups in R&D department of private companies, who were the partners of National Innovation Agency (NIA), Thailand, in 2009 - 2010. The participants were 177 members in 45 work groups had completed the questionnaires. Mplus was used to analyze the data. The research findings showed that IWB  affected two-level factors. Group innovative work behavior had a direct effect on the innovative product. But it did not show the significant effects of any group factors on group innovative work behavior. However, organizational supportiveness significantly affected team climate inventory. Key words:   innovative work behavior, product innovation, multi-level analysis āļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāđƒāļ™āļ„āļĢāļąāđ‰āļ‡āļ™āļĩāđ‰āļĄāļĩāļˆāļļāļ”āļĄāļļāđˆāļ‡āļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ—āļ”āļŠāļ­āļšāđāļšāļšāļˆāļģāļĨāļ­āļ‡āđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāļžāļŦāļļāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļ›āļąāļˆāļˆāļąāļĒāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļšāļļāļ„āļ„āļĨāđāļĨāļ°āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļ—āļĩāđˆāļŠāđˆāļ‡āļœāļĨāļ•āđˆāļ­āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄāđƒāļ™āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļšāļļāļ„āļ„āļĨāđāļĨāļ°āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđ‚āļ”āļĒāļĄāļĩāļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļœāļĨāļīāļ•āļ āļąāļ“āļ‘āđŒāđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļœāļĨāļœāļĨāļīāļ•āļŠāļļāļ”āļ—āđ‰āļēāļĒ āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ•āļąāļ§āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļ„āļ·āļ­āļŦāļąāļ§āļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™āđāļĨāļ°āļŠāļĄāļēāļŠāļīāļāđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™āđƒāļ™āđāļœāļ™āļāļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒāđāļĨāļ°āļžāļąāļ’āļ™āļēāļœāļĨāļīāļ•āļ āļąāļ“āļ‘āđŒāđƒāļŦāļĄāđˆāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļšāļĢāļīāļĐāļąāļ—āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ„āļ™āđ„āļ—āļĒāļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļ„āļĒāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļēāļ‡āļ§āļąāļĨ āļŦāļĢāļ·āļ­āļāļēāļĢāļ„āļąāļ”āđ€āļĨāļ·āļ­āļāļ§āđˆāļēāļĄāļĩāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļžāļąāļ’āļ™āļēāļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄ āļŦāļĢāļ·āļ­āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āđ€āļ„āļĢāļ·āļ­āļ‚āđˆāļēāļĒāļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļŠāļģāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄāđāļŦāđˆāļ‡āļŠāļēāļ•āļī (NIA) āđƒāļ™āļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļ›āļĩāļž.āļĻ. 2552 āļ–āļķāļ‡ 2553 āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ•āļąāļ§āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļģāļ™āļ§āļ™āļ—āļąāđ‰āļ‡āļŠāļīāđ‰āļ™ 177 āļ„āļ™ āļˆāļēāļ 45 āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļĄāļđāļĨāđƒāļŠāđ‰āđ‚āļ›āļĢāđāļāļĢāļĄ Mplus āļœāļĨāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļžāļšāļ§āđˆāļēāļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄāđƒāļ™āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļšāļļāļ„āļ„āļĨāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāļąāļšāļœāļĨāļˆāļēāļāļ•āļąāļ§āđāļ›āļĢāļ—āļąāđ‰āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļšāļļāļ„āļ„āļĨāđāļĨāļ°āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄāđƒāļ™āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļŠāđˆāļ‡āļœāļĨāļ•āđˆāļ­āļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļœāļĨāļīāļ•āļ āļąāļ“āļ‘āđŒ āđāļ•āđˆāđ„āļĄāđˆāļžāļšāļ§āđˆāļēāļ•āļąāļ§āđāļ›āļĢāđƒāļ™āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™āđƒāļ”āļŠāđˆāļ‡āļœāļĨāļ•āđˆāļ­āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄāđƒāļ™āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āđ„āļĢāļāđ‡āļ•āļēāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ­āļ‡āļ„āđŒāļāļēāļĢāļŠāđˆāļ‡āļœāļĨāļ•āđˆāļ­āļšāļĢāļĢāļĒāļēāļāļēāļĻāļŠāđˆāļ‡āđ€āļŠāļĢāļīāļĄāļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄāđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļ™āļąāļĒāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļāļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļ–āļīāļ•āļī āļ„āļģāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļ: āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄ  āļ™āļ§āļąāļ•āļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļœāļĨāļīāļ•āļ āļąāļ“āļ‘āđŒ  āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļžāļŦāļļāļĢāļ°āļ”āļą

    Determinants of emergent reading

    Get PDF
    Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1993.Includes bibliographical references (leaves 124-135).Microfiche.x, 135 leaves, bound 29 cmThis study attempted to find effective home and school predictors of the emergent reading ability in kindergartners in Bangkok, Thailand. Emergent reading ability in this research consisted of four components--environmental print awareness, the awareness of print conventions, the awareness of print functions, and reading attempts. Three groups of home and school variables--parents' reading to children, parents' speech, and the schools' teaching of reading and writing--were examined. Ninety-two children attending level two of five private kindergartens, as well as their parents, were participants in this research. Participants' reading attempts were assessed by using a favorite storybook. The other three components were evaluated by direct observation of the children and by questioning the parents and teachers of these children. Parents of the participants were asked whether they read to their children and how they read. Their answers were recorded and transcribed so that the clarity of parents' speech, the similarity between parents' speech and textual language, and the complexity of the speech could be assessed. The schools' teaching of reading and writing was reported by teachers. The items of these four components of emergent reading ability were factor analyzed and this resulted in two factors, emergent reading skills and knowledge of print. Using multiple regression, good predictors of emergent reading skills were: schools' cumulative instruction in reading words, parents' speech complexity (number of coordinations per T-unit), frequency of parents' explanation while reading to their children, and writing assignment frequency. The latter had negative regression coefficient. These predictors explained 27.5% of the variance of emergent reading skills. Good predictors of the knowledge of print were frequency of parents' reading to their children and reading assignment frequency. These predictors accounted for 21% of the variance in the criterion. These results suggested that effective instruction, either formally or informally, before first grade fosters emergent reading ability of young children. Moreover, the factors which have been confirmed to be useful in enhancing children's literacy in western countries are also revealed to be important fer children in an Asian Country

    A Psychometric Analysis of the Workplace Forgiveness Scale

    No full text
    Though there are measures of forgiveness published in the behavioural science literature, very few scales are available to measure forgiveness in workplace relationships. The Workplace Forgiveness Scale aimed to measure forgiveness of a specific offense. Data from 348 professional nurses in Thailand were subjected to an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and the psychometric properties of the scale were examined. Results from EFA suggested retaining four underlying factors of the forgiveness construct: Overcoming Negative Thought and Feeling toward the Offender, Seeking to Understand the Offender’s Reasons, Fostering Positive Approaches towards the Offender, and Belief in the Benefits of Forgiveness. Reliability coefficients for the total scale and subscales were adequate. Evidence of construct validity is presented. Scores on the forgiveness scale were positively associated with other related forgiveness constructs. Nomological validity analysis supported the theoretical networks of the forgiveness construct. Forgiveness played the complete mediating role in the relationship between dispositional forgiveness and willingness to reconcile, and played a partial mediating role in the relationship between rumination and seeking to revenge the offender. Bootstrap analysis on the parameter estimates of the sample results revealed satisfactory level of internal replicability and stability of the results across the samples. Implications for future research are discussed

    āļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ—āļēāļ‡āļˆāļīāļ•āđāļĨāļ°āļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļ‡āļāļąāļšāļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āđ‚āļĢāļ‡āļ‡āļēāļ™āļĒāļēāļŠāļđāļš āļāļĢāļ°āļ—āļĢāļ§āļ‡āļāļēāļĢāļ„āļĨāļąāļ‡ The Relationships among Social Situations and Psychological Immunity

    No full text
    The objectives of this research were: 1) to study with variable groups, situational, psychological trait,and psychological state could most explain the variance of ethical work behavior among personnels at Thailand Tobacco Monopoly, The Ministry of Finance. 2) to study the interaction effects betweensituational and psychological trait variable on ethical work behavior and 3) to compare the ethical work behavior between personnels whose received different try per of payment, and including personnel with different demographic background. Three hounded and thirty personnels at Thailand Tobacco Monopoly were randomly selected by using quota sampling and simple random sampling techniques. Eleven questionnaires were used as a data collection instruments. Frequency, percentage, arithmetic mean and standard deviation were used for descriptive statistics, while t-test, ANOVA, Pearson correlation and multiple regressions were used for inferential statistics. The research findings were as follows: 1) The psychological trait variable could most explain (57%) of the variance of ethical work behavior compared to the psychological state factors most and situational factors. These psychological trait Achievement motivation is the most powerful predicts. 2) There were interaction effects between the psychological trail, achievement motivation, and situation variable, social support from superordinate. That was, the personnels who received more social support and having higher achievement motivation expressed more ethical work behavior compared to the personnels who received lesser support and having lower achievement motivation. These findings were found at significance level .05 in the total group, the younger group (age â‰Ī41.8), the lesser work experience group (â‰Ī15.6 years), the common level 4-6 with monthly payment group and the common level 1-5 with per hour payment group. 3) The personnels receiving different try of payment in the younger group showed different ethical work behavior at significance level .05. In the younger group, the personnels with monthly payment expressed higher ethical work behavior than the personnels with per hour payment.Keywords: ethical, work behavior, achievement motivation, social supportāļšāļ—āļ„āļąāļ”āļĒāđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒāļ™āļĩāđ‰āļĄāļĩāļ§āļąāļ•āļ–āļļāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļ‡āļ„āđŒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­ 1) āļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ§āđˆāļēāļĄāļĩāļ•āļąāļ§āđāļ›āļĢāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄ āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ—āļēāļ‡āļˆāļīāļ•āđ€āļ”āļīāļĄ āđāļĨāļ°āļ•āļąāļ§āđāļ›āļĢ āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ—āļēāļ‡āļˆāļīāļ•āļ•āļēāļĄāļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļ­āļģāļ™āļēāļˆāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ­āļ˜āļīāļšāļēāļĒāļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ 2) āļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ›āļāļīāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒ āļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļ•āļąāļ§āđāļ›āļĢāđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄ āļāļąāļšāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ—āļēāļ‡āļˆāļīāļ•āđ€āļ”āļīāļĄ āļ•āđˆāļ­āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āđāļĨāļ° 3) āđ€āļ›āļĢāļĩāļĒāļšāđ€āļ—āļĩāļĒāļšāļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļĢāļēāļĒāđ€āļ”āļ·āļ­āļ™āđāļĨāļ°āļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļĢāļēāļĒāļŠāļąāđˆāļ§āđ‚āļĄāļ‡ āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ—āļēāļ‡ āļŠāļĩāļ§āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄāļ•āđˆāļēāļ‡āļāļąāļ™ āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ•āļąāļ§āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡ āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āđ‚āļĢāļ‡āļ‡āļēāļ™āļĒāļēāļŠāļđāļš āļāļĢāļ°āļ—āļĢāļ§āļ‡āļāļēāļĢāļ„āļĨāļąāļ‡ āđƒāļ™āļŠāđˆāļ§āļ™āļāļĨāļēāļ‡ āļˆāļģāļ™āļ§āļ™ 336 āļ„āļ™ āļ‹āļķāđˆāļ‡āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĄāļēāļˆāļēāļ āļāļģāļŦāļ™āļ”āđ‚āļ„āļ§āļ•āļēāđāļĨāļ°āļ§āļīāļ˜āļĩāļŠāļļāđˆāļĄāđāļšāļšāļ‡āđˆāļēāļĒ āđ€āļ„āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡āļĄāļ·āļ­āļ—āļĩāđˆāđƒāļŠāđ‰āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™ āđāļšāļšāļŠāļ­āļšāļ–āļēāļĄ āļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļĄāļđāļĨāļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒāļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļ„āđˆāļēāļŠāļ–āļīāļ•āļī t āļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒ āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđāļ›āļĢāļ›āļĢāļ§āļ™ āļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļ„āđˆāļēāļŠāļąāļĄāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒāļŠāļŦāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāđāļšāļšāđ€āļžāļĩāļĒāļĢāđŒāļŠāļąāļ™ āđāļĨāļ°āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļāļēāļĢāļ–āļ”āļ–āļ­āļĒāļžāļŦāļļāļ„āļđāļ“ āļœāļĨāļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒāļžāļšāļ§āđˆāļē 1) āļ•āļąāļ§āđāļ›āļĢāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļ—āļēāļ‡āļˆāļīāļ•āđ€āļ”āļīāļĄāļ­āļ˜āļīāļšāļēāļĒāļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļŠāļđāļ‡āļŠāļļāļ” āļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĒāļĨāļ° 57 āđ‚āļ”āļĒāļĄāļĩāļ•āļąāļ§āđāļ›āļĢāđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāđƒāļāđˆāļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒ āļĨāļąāļāļĐāļ“āļ°āļĄāļļāđˆāļ‡āļ­āļ™āļēāļ„āļ•āļ„āļ§āļšāļ„āļļāļĄāļ•āļ™ āđ€āļˆāļ•āļ„āļ•āļīāļ•āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāļĒāļąāđˆāļ§āļĒāļļāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđāļĨāļ°āļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄāļˆāļēāļāļŦāļąāļ§āļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļ•āļąāļ§āļ—āļģāļ™āļēāļĒāļ—āļĩāđˆāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļ 2) āļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„āļĄāļˆāļēāļāļŦāļąāļ§āļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļ–āđ‰āļēāļĄāļĩāđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāđƒāļāđˆāļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒāļĄāļēāļ āļˆāļ°āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļœāļđāđ‰āļĄāļĩāļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļĄāļēāļāļāļ§āđˆāļēāļœāļđāđ‰āļ—āļĩāđˆāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĢāļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļˆāļēāļāļŦāļąāļ§āļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ™āđ‰āļ­āļĒāđāļĨāļ°āļĄāļĩāđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāđƒāļāđˆāļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒāļ™āđ‰āļ­āļĒ āđāļĨāļ°āļžāļšāļœāļĨāđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĢāļ§āļĄ āđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļ­āļēāļĒāļļāļ™āđ‰āļ­āļĒ āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļšāļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ™āđ‰āļ­āļĒ āđāļĨāļ°āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļĢāļēāļĒāđ€āļ”āļ·āļ­āļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļš (āļ‹āļĩ) 4–6 āđāļĨāļ°āļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļĢāļēāļĒāļŠāļąāđˆāļ§āđ‚āļĄāļ‡āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļš (āļ‹āļĩ) 1-5 (p< .05) 3) āļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāđƒāļāđˆāļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒāļĄāļēāļ āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļœāļđāđ‰āļĄāļĩāļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļĄāļēāļāļāļ§āđˆāļēāļœāļđāđ‰āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāđƒāļāđˆāļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒāļ™āđ‰āļ­āļĒ āļžāļšāđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĢāļ§āļĄāđāļĨāļ°āļ—āļļāļāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒ āđāļĨāļ°āļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļŦāđ‡āļ™āđāļšāļšāļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļ—āļĩāđˆāļ”āļĩāļˆāļēāļāļŦāļąāļ§āļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ™āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™āļĄāļēāļ āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļœāļđāđ‰āļĄāļĩāļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļĄāļēāļāļāļ§āđˆāļēāļœāļđāđ‰āļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļŦāđ‡āļ™āđāļšāļšāļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļ—āļĩāđˆāļ”āļĩāļˆāļēāļāļŦāļąāļ§āļŦāļ™āđ‰āļēāđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ™āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ™āđ‰āļ­āļĒ āļžāļšāļ—āļąāđ‰āļ‡āđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĢāļ§āļĄāđāļĨāļ°āđƒāļ™āļ—āļļāļāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒ 4) āļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāļĒāļąāđˆāļ§āļĒāļļāļ™āđ‰āļ­āļĒ āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļœāļđāđ‰āļĄāļĩāļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļĄāļēāļāļāļ§āđˆāļēāļœāļđāđ‰āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļĢāļąāļšāļĢāļđāđ‰āļŠāļ–āļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ“āđŒāļĒāļąāđˆāļ§āļĒāļļāļĄāļēāļ āđāļĨāļ°āļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāđ€āļŦāļ•āļļāļœāļĨāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļĄāļēāļ āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļœāļđāđ‰āļĄāļĩāļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļĄāļēāļāļāļ§āđˆāļēāļœāļđāđ‰āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāđ€āļŦāļ•āļļāļœāļĨāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāļ™āđ‰āļ­āļĒ 5) āļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āđ‚āļĢāļ‡āļ‡āļēāļ™āļĒāļēāļŠāļđāļš āļāļĢāļ°āļ—āļĢāļ§āļ‡āļāļēāļĢāļ„āļĨāļąāļ‡ āļ›āļĢāļ°āđ€āļ āļ—āļĢāļēāļĒāđ€āļ”āļ·āļ­āļ™ (x = 4.84) āļāļąāļšāļžāļ™āļąāļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļĢāļēāļĒāļŠāļąāđˆāļ§āđ‚āļĄāļ‡ (x = 4.56) āđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ­āļēāļĒāļļāļ™āđ‰āļ­āļĒ āļĄāļĩāļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄāđāļ•āļāļ•āđˆāļēāļ‡āļāļąāļ™ (p< .05)āļ„āļģāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļ: āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļˆāļĢāļīāļĒāļ˜āļĢāļĢāļĄ āđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāđƒāļāđˆāļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒ āļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ™āļąāļšāļŠāļ™āļļāļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļąāļ‡āļ„

    āļœāļĨāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļŠāļąāđ‰āļ™āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļ•āđˆāļ­āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•(The Effect of Classroom Goal Structure on Student’s Achievement Goals)

    No full text
    āļšāļ—āļ„āļąāļ”āļĒāđˆāļ­ āļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ„āļĢāļąāđ‰āļ‡āļ™āļĩāđ‰āļĄāļĩāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļĄāļļāđˆāļ‡āļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ—āļ”āļŠāļ­āļšāļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļ•āđˆāļ­āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒ  āđ‚āļ”āļĒāđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāļ„āļ·āļ­āļšāļĢāļĢāļĒāļēāļāļēāļĻāļ—āļĩāđˆāļŠāļ°āļ—āđ‰āļ­āļ™āļ–āļķāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļŠāļąāđ‰āļ™āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™ āđāļšāđˆāļ‡āļ­āļ­āļāđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™ āđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāđāļŠāļ”āļ‡āļœāļĨāļ‡āļēāļ™ āđāļĨāļ°āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđ€āļŠāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļŠāļēāļ āļŠāđˆāļ§āļ™āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒāļ™āļąāđ‰āļ™āļ„āļ·āļ­āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ„āļīāļ”āđ€āļāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļāļąāļšāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āđ€āļĄāļ·āđˆāļ­āļŠāļīāđ‰āļ™āļŠāļļāļ”āļžāļĪāļ•āļīāļāļĢāļĢāļĄ āļ‹āļķāđˆāļ‡āļ­āļēāļĻāļąāļĒāđāļ™āļ§āļ„āļīāļ”āļĢāļđāļ›āđāļšāļšāđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđāļšāļš 2x2 āļĄāļēāđƒāļŠāđ‰āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē āļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ„āļĢāļąāđ‰āļ‡āļ™āļĩāđ‰āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļ—āļ”āļĨāļ­āļ‡āđāļšāļšāđāļŸāļ„āđ€āļ•āļ­āļĢāđŒāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļĨāļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļāļēāļĢāļŠāļļāđˆāļĄāļŠāļĄāļšāļđāļĢāļ“āđŒ āđ‚āļ”āļĒāļĄāļĩāļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āļ„āļ“āļ°āļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļĻāļēāļŠāļ•āļĢāđŒ āļˆāļģāļ™āļ§āļ™ 60 āļ„āļ™ āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļœāļđāđ‰āļĄāļĩāļŠāđˆāļ§āļ™āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒ āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āļ—āļģāđāļšāļšāļŠāļ­āļšāļ–āļēāļĄāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđ€āļŠāļ·āđˆāļ­āđ€āļāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļāļąāļšāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ‰āļĨāļēāļ” āđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒāļāđˆāļ­āļ™āđ€āļĢāļīāđˆāļĄāļāļīāļˆāļāļĢāļĢāļĄ āļˆāļēāļāļ™āļąāđ‰āļ™āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āđ€āļ‚āđ‰āļēāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āđƒāļ™āļ§āļīāļŠāļēāļ—āļĪāļĐāļŽāļĩāļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āđ€āļ§āļĨāļē 6 āļŠāļąāļ›āļ”āļēāļŦāđŒ āđ€āļĄāļ·āđˆāļ­āđ€āļŠāļĢāđ‡āļˆāļŠāļīāđ‰āļ™āļāļīāļˆāļāļĢāļĢāļĄ āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āļ—āļģāđāļšāļšāļŠāļ­āļšāļ–āļēāļĄāđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒ āđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒ āļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļĄāļđāļĨāļ—āļĩāđˆāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļˆāļēāļāđāļšāļšāļŠāļ­āļšāļ–āļēāļĄāļ—āļąāđ‰āļ‡āļŦāļĄāļ”āļ™āļģāļĄāļēāļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒāļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđāļ›āļĢāļ›āļĢāļ§āļ™āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāđāļšāļšāļŠāļ­āļ‡āļ—āļēāļ‡ āļœāļĨāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļžāļšāļ§āđˆāļē āđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāđāļŠāļ”āļ‡āļœāļĨāļ‡āļēāļ™āļŠāđˆāļ‡āļœāļĨāļ•āđˆāļ­āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāđāļŠāļ”āļ‡āļœāļĨāļ‡āļēāļ™āđāļšāļšāđ€āļ‚āđ‰āļēāļŦāļēāđāļĨāļ°āļ­āļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļžāļĨāļˆāļ°āđ€āļžāļīāđˆāļĄāļ‚āļķāđ‰āļ™āđ€āļĄāļ·āđˆāļ­āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļąāļšāđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđ€āļŠāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļŠāļēāļ āđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāđāļŠāļ”āļ‡āļœāļĨāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļģāđƒāļŦāđ‰āđ€āļāļīāļ”āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāđāļŠāļ”āļ‡āļœāļĨāļ‡āļēāļ™āđāļšāļšāļŦāļĨāļĩāļāđ€āļĨāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ‡ āđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­Â Â Â Â  āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđ€āļŠāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļŠāļēāļāļ•āđ‰āļ­āļ‡āļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļąāļšāđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāđāļŠāļ”āļ‡āļœāļĨāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļģāđƒāļŦāđ‰āđ€āļāļīāļ”āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđ€āļŠāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļŠāļēāļāđāļšāļšāđ€āļ‚āđ‰āļēāļŦāļē āđāļĨāļ°āđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāđāļŠāļ”āļ‡āļœāļĨāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļģāđƒāļŦāđ‰āđ€āļāļīāļ”āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđ€āļŠāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļŠāļēāļāđāļšāļšāļŦāļĨāļĩāļāđ€āļĨāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ‡   āļ„āļģāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļ: āđ‚āļ„āļĢāļ‡āļŠāļĢāđ‰āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒ āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒ āļāļēāļĢāļ§āļīāđ€āļ„āļĢāļēāļ°āļŦāđŒāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđāļ›āļĢāļ›āļĢāļ§āļ™āđāļšāļšāļŠāļ­āļ‡āļ—āļē
    corecore