People of differing self-efficacy perceive the world in fundamentally different ways. People with a high self-efficacy are generally of the opinion that they are in control of their own lives; that their own actions and decisions shape their lives. On the other hand, people with low self-efficacy may see their lives as somewhat out of their hands.
29、自我意象與行為
People will be more inclined to take on a task if they believe they can succeed. People generally avoid tasks where their self-efficacy is low, but will engage in tasks where their self-efficacy is high. People with a self-efficacy significantly beyond their actual ability likely to overestimate their ability to complete tasks, which can lead to irreversible damage. On the other hand, people with a self-efficacy significantly lower than their ability are unlikely to grow and expand their skills. Research shows that the “optimum” level of self-efficacy is a little above ability, which encourages people to tackle challenging tasks and gain valuable experience.
30、團體行為不是個人行為的加和
The behavior of groups cannot be understood solely as the aggregate behavior of individuals. It is not possible, for example, to understand modern warfare by summing up the aggressive tendencies of individuals. A person may behave very differently in a crowd—say, when at a football game, at a religious service, or on a picket line—than when alone or with family members. Several children together may vandalize a building, even though none of them would do it on his or her own. By the same token, an adult will often be more generous and responsive to the needs of others as a member of, say, a club or religious group than he or she would be inclined to be in private. The group situation provides the rewards of companionship and acceptance for going along with the shared action of the group and makes it difficult to assign blame or credit to any one person.
31、“霍蘭德編碼”的六大個性類別
Holland Codes are personality types created by psychologist John L. Holland as part of his theory of career choice. Holland mapped these types into a hexagon which he then broke down into the RIASEC job environments. Holland argues that 2-3 types dominate in each person.
1.Realistic—practical, physical, hands-on, tool-oriented
2.Investigative—analytical, intellectual, scientific, explorative
3.Artistic—creative, original, independent, chaotic
4.Social—cooperative, supporting, helping, healing/nurturing
5.Enterprising—competitive environments, leadership, persuading
6.Conventional—detail-oriented, organizing, clerical
32、團體對行為的影響
In addition to belonging to the social and cultural settings into which they are born, people voluntarily join groups based on shared occupations, beliefs, or interests （such as unions, political parties, or clubs）. Membership in these groups influences how people think of themselves and how others think of them. These groups impose expectations and rules that make the behavior of members more predictable and that enable each group to function smoothly and retain its identity. The rules may be informal and conveyed by example, such as how to behave at a social gathering, or they may be written rules that are strictly enforced. Formal groups often signal the kind of behavior they favor by means of rewards （such as praise, prizes, or privileges） and punishments （such as threats, fines, or rejections）.
Affiliation with any social group, whether one joins it voluntarily or is born into it, brings some advantages of larger numbers: the potential for pooling resources （such as money or labor）, concerted effort （such as strikes, boycotts, or voting）, and identity and recognition （such as organizations, emblems, or attention from the media）. Within each group, the members’ attitudes, which often include an image of their group as being superior to others, help ensure cohesion within the group but can also lead to serious conflict with other groups. Attitudes toward other groups are likely to involve stereotyping—treating all members of a group as though they were the same and perceiving in those people’s actual behavior only those qualities that fit the observer’s preconceptions. Such social prejudice may include blind respect for some categories of people, such as doctors or clergy, as well as blind disrespect for other categories of people who are, say, foreign-born or women.
33、行為學家關於個性決定行為的理論
Behaviorists explain personality in terms of the effects external stimuli have on behavior. It was a radical shift away from Freudian philosophy. This school of thought was developed by B. F. Skinner who put forth a model which emphasized the mutual interaction of the person or “the organism” with its environment. Skinner believed that children do bad things because the behavior obtains attention that serves as a reinforcer. For example: a child cries because the child’s crying in the past has led to attention. These are the response, and consequences. The response is the child crying, and the attention that child gets is the reinforcing consequence. According to this theory, people’s behavior is formed by processes such as operant conditioning. Skinner put forward a “three term contingency model” which helped promote analysis of behavior based on the “Stimulus—Response—Consequence Model” in which the critical question is:“Under which circumstances or antecedent ‘stimuli’ does the organism engage in a particular behavior or ‘response’, which in turn produces a particular ‘consequence’?”
Richard Herrnstein extended this theory by accounting for attitudes and traits. An attitude develops as the response strength （the tendency to respond） in the presences of a group of stimuli become stable. Rather than describing conditional traits in non-behavioral language, response strength in a given situation accounts for the environmental portion. Herrnstein also saw traits as having a large genetic or biological component as do most modern behaviorists.
34、社會和階層對行為的影響
Fair or unfair, desirable or undesirable, social distinctions are a salient part of almost every culture. The form of the distinctions varies with place and time, sometimes including rigid castes, sometimes tribal or clan hierarchies, sometimes a more flexible social class. Class distinctions are made chiefly on the basis of wealth, education, and occupation, but they are also likely to be associated with other subcultural differences, such as dress, dialect, and attitudes toward school and work. These economic, political, and cultural distinctions are recognized by almost all members of a society—and resented by some of them.
The class into which people are born affects what language, diet, tastes, and interests they will have as children, and therefore influences how they will perceive the social world. Moreover, class affects what pressures and opportunities people will experience and therefore affects what paths their lives are likely to take—including schooling, occupation, marriage, and standard of living. Still, many people live lives very different from the norm for their class.
35、理性選擇理論
Rational choice theory, also known as rational action theory, is a framework for understanding and often formally modeling social and economic behavior. It is the dominant theoretical paradigm in microeconomics. It is also central to modern political science and is used by scholars in other disciplines such as sociology. The “rationality” described by rational choice theory is different from the colloquial and most philosophical uses of rationality. Although models of rational choice are diverse, all assume individuals choose the best action according to stable preference functions and constraints facing them. Most models have additional assumptions. Proponents of rational choice models do not claim that a model’s assumptions are a full description of reality, only that good models can aid reasoning and provide help in formulating falsifiable hypotheses, whether intuitive or not. Successful hypotheses are those that survive empirical tests.
36、人們為什麼遵從社會規範
Since people are social beings, we must exchange with one another. We evolve norms to reduce the risk by making one another’s behavior sufficiently predictable. （We are in a way programmed to know how to act, behave, or respond when interacting with each other）. For example:“Hello sir, could you point me in the direction of the men’s room?”
This man asked this question to a complete stranger and he was following his injunctive norms （behaviors which are perceived as being approved of by other people） when asking this question the man also predicted the response he would get. “Oh yes, the bathrooms are in the back left corner.” If these social norms were not pre-programmed in us like they are, this man would have had a very hard time even with something as simple as asking directions.
We accept norms not only because our friends expect us to, but because we risk our self-respect if we deviate. Religious beliefs may be one contributor to why we might conform and follow norms. The phrase “I’m not that kind of person” indicates that we have certain beliefs about proper behavior （Rodney Stark）. Norms like these are generally taught to us as we grow up.
37、理想追隨者的十六大原則
Stated principles of ideal followership：
1.Demonstrating respect
2.Thinking win/Win
3.Working within the system
4.Acting proactively
5.Appreciating differences
6.Striving toward a common goal （one shared with leaders）
7.Recognizing any authority that leaders may possess
8.Tailoring actions to accord with leaders’ ideals
9.Making decisions based on a set of values
10.Enthusiastically working towards organizational goals while nevertheless remaining accountable for results
11.Gaining the trust of leaders
12.Fostering enough independence to allow followers to achieve goals without complete reliance on leaders
13.Requiring only high-level guidance
14.Demonstrating effectiveness when working in a group independently
15.Recognizing the hierarchy of leadership while becoming a self-motivated mini-leader
16.Proactively working to fulfill or exceed expectations
38、責任承擔
Responsibility assumption is a doctrine in the personal growth field holding that each individual has substantial or total responsibility for the events and circumstances that befall them in their life. While there is little that is notable about the notion that each person has at least some role in shaping their experience, the doctrine of responsibility assumption posits that the individual’s mental contribution to his or her own experience is substantially greater than is normally thought. “I must have wanted this” is the type of catchphrase used by adherents of this doctrine when encountering situations, pleasant or unpleasant, to remind them that their own desires and choices led to the present outcome.
The term responsibility assumption thus has a specialized meaning beyond the general concept of taking responsibility for something, and is not to be confused with the general notion of making an assumption that a concept such as “responsibility” exists.
39、社會學習理論
Social learning theories propose that people internalize moral codes more through the process of socialization—learning behaviors through interaction with others—rather than through a stage-by-stage development process. Specifically, social learning theorists maintain a young person learns how to behave based on how elders （primarily parent figures） respond to the person’s violations of and compliance with rules. Rewards for acceptable behavior and sanctions （penalties） for transgressions indicate what appropriate behaviors are.
40、決策的概念
Decision making is the cognitive process leading to the selection of a course of action among several alternatives. Every decision making process produces a final choice. It can be an action or an opinion. It begins when we need to do something but know not what. Therefore, decision making is a reasoning process which can be rational or irrational, can be based on explicit assumptions or tacit assumptions.
Structured rational decision making is an important part of all science-based professions, where specialists apply their knowledge in a given area to making informed decisions. For example, medical decision making often involves making a diagnosis and selecting an appropriate treatment. Some research using naturalistic methods shows, however, that in situations with higher time pressure, higher stakes, or increased ambiguities, experts use intuitive decision making rather than structured approaches, following a recognition primed decision approach to fit a set of indicators into the expert’s experience and immediately arrive at a satisfactory course of action without weighing alternatives.
41、自由意誌
The question of free will is whether, and in what sense, rational agents exercise control over their actions and decisions. Addressing this question requires understanding the relationship between freedom and cause, and determining whether the laws of nature are causally deterministic. The various philosophical positions taken differ on whether all events are determined or not—determinism versus indeterminism—and also on whether freedom can coexist with determinism or not—compatibilism versus incompatibilism. So, for instance, hard determinists argue that the universe is deterministic, and that this makes free will impossible.
The principle of free will has religious, ethical, and scientific implications. For example, in the religious realm, free will may imply that an omnipotent divinity does not assert its power over individual will and choices. In ethics, it may imply that individuals can be held morally accountable for their actions. In the scientific realm, it may imply that the actions of the body, including the brain and the mind, are not wholly determined by physical causality. The question of free will has been a central issue since the beginning of philosophical thought.
42、真正的自由及其兩大要素
Real Freedom is a concept of freedom that expands upon notions of negative freedom by incorporating not simply institutional or other constraints on a person’s choices, but also the requirements of physical reality, resources and personal capacity. To have real freedom, an individual must:
1.Not be prevented from acting on his/her will （i.e. he/she must have traditional negative freedom）; and
2.Possess the resources or capacities actually to carry out his/her will.
Real freedom expands on negative freedom by adding the idea of actually being able to exercise a capacity or resource in the absence of constraint; but does not go as far as some ideas of positive freedom, by refraining from appeal to self-government by a real, best, or higher self.