كليدواژه :
واكنش رواني , الگوهاي سنجشي و ساختاري , خشم , شناخت منفي
چكيده فارسي :
ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ: ﻧﻈﺮﯾﻪ واﮐﻨﺶ رواﻧﯽ ﻓﺮض ﻣﯽﮐﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ اﻓﺮاد ﻫﻨﮕﺎم درﯾﺎﻓﺖ ﭘﯿﺎﻣﯽ ﮐﻪ آزادي آﻧﻬﺎ را ﻣﻮرد ﺗﻬﺪﯾﺪ ﻗﺮار ﻣﯽدﻫﺪ؛ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻘﺎوﻣﺖ ﺑﻪ آن ﭘﯿﺎم واﮐﻨﺶ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﯽدﻫﻨﺪ. ﻣﻮﺟﺮان، ﺗﻤﺎﯾﻞ دارﻧﺪ ﺧـﻮد، ﻗﯿﻤـﺖ اﺟـﺎره ﻣﻨﺰل ﺧﻮد را ﺗﻌﯿﯿﻦ ﮐﻨﻨﺪ. در زﻣﺎن ﮐﺮوﻧﺎ ﮐﻪ دوﻟﺖ ﻧﺮخ ﭘﺎﯾﯿﻦﺗﺮي را ﺑﺮاي اﻓﺰاﯾﺶ اﺟﺎره ﺳﻨﻮاﺗﯽ ﺗﻌﯿﯿﻦ ﮐﺮد؛ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﯿﺖ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﯽ ﺑﺮاي ﺳﻨﺠﺶ اﯾﻦ ﻓﺮﺿﯿﻪ ﭘﯿﺶ آﻣﺪ. دو اﻟﮕﻮي واﮐﻨﺶ رواﻧﯽ ﯾﮑﯽ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﺗﻬﺪﯾﺪ ﺑﻪ آزادي )دﯾﻼرد و ﺷﻦ،2005( و دﯾﮕﺮي ﺑﺪون آن )ﻟﯿﻨﺪﺳﯽ، 20005( وﺟﻮد دارد ﮐﻪ ﻫﺪف ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ، ﻣﻘﺎﯾﺴﻪ آﻧﻬﺎﺳﺖ. روش: ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪي ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ 395 ﻧﻔﺮ از ﻣﻮﺟﺮان ﺷﻬﺮ اﺻﻔﻬﺎن و ﺑﻬﺎرﺳﺘﺎن و ﺳﭙﺎﻫﺎنﺷﻬﺮ ﺑﻮدﻧﺪ ﮐـﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﯿﻮهي در دﺳﺘﺮس اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﺷﺪﻧﺪ و ﺑﻪ اﺑﺰارﻫﺎي ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻘﯿـﺎس ﻫـﺎي ﻧﮕـﺮش )ﻣﻮرﮔـﺎن و ﻣﯿﻠﺮ،2002(، ﻗﺼﺪ رﻓﺘﺎري )ﻣﻮرﮔﺎن،2008(، ﺗﻬﺪﯾﺪ آزادي )دﯾﻼرد و ﺷﻦ )2005(؛ ﻟﯿﻨﺪﺳﯽ )2005((، واﮐﻨﺶ رواﻧﯽ )دﯾﻼرد و ﺷﻦ،2005(، ﻣﻘﯿﺎس ﺗﺮﻣﯿﻢ واﮐﻨﺸﯽ )RRS( )ﮐﻮﺋﯿﮏ و اﺳﺘﻔﻨﺴـﻮن ،2008(، ارزﯾﺎﺑﯽ ﻣﻨﺒﻊ )ﻣﯿﻠﺮ و ﻫﻤﮑﺎران،2007(، ﺧﺸﻢ )دﯾﻼرد و ﺷﻦ،2005( و ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻣﻨﻔﯽ )دﯾﻼرد و ﺷـﻦ، 2005( ﭘﺎﺳﺦ دادﻧﺪ. ﺑﺮاي ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ دادهﻫﺎ از ﻣﺪلﻫﺎي ﻣﻌﺎدﻻت ﺳـﺎﺧﺘﺎري )SEM( و ﻣـﺪﻟﻬﺎي ﻧﻈﺮﯾـﻪ
ﺳﺆال-ﭘﺎﺳﺦ )IRM( اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﯾﺎﻓﺘﻪﻫﺎ: ﻧﺘﺎﯾﺞ ﻧﺸﺎن داد ﮐﻪ اﻟﮕﻮي دﯾﻼرد و ﺷﻦ )2005( از ﺑﺮازش ﮐﺎﻓﯽ ﺑﺮﺧﻮردار اﺳﺖ و ﻧﺴـﺒﺖ ﺑـﻪ اﻟﮕﻮي ﻟﯿﻨﺪﺳﯽ )2005( ﺑﺮازش ﺑﻬﺘﺮي دارد. در واﻗﻊ واﮐﻨﺶ رواﻧﯽ ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ اﯾﻦ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺘﻐﯿﺮﻫﺎي دﯾﮕﺮ اﻧﮕﯿﺰش، ﻧﮕﺮش و ﻣﻨﺒﻊ ارزﯾﺎﺑﯽ( اﺛﺮ دارد؛ ﺧﻮد، ﺧﺸﻢ و ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻣﻨﻔﯽ را ﺑﺎز ﺗﻮﻟﯿﺪ ﻣﯽﮐﻨـﺪ و در ﻧﻈـﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ اﯾﻦ دو ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪ ﻫﯿﺠﺎﻧﯽ و ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﯽ وﯾﮋﮔﯽﻫﺎي ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎري ﻣﺪل را ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﻣﯽﮐﻨﺪ.
ﻧﺘﯿﺠﻪﮔﯿﺮي: ﺗﻮﺻﯿﻪ ﻣﯽﮔﺮدد، ﭘﯿﺎمرﺳﺎنﻫﺎ ﭘﯿﺎم را ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮي ﮐﻪ واﮐﻨﺶ رواﻧـﯽ ﮐﻤﺘـﺮي اﯾﺠـﺎد ﮐﻨـﺪ؛ﻦ و اراﺋﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﯾﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺧﺸﻢ و ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻣﻨﻔﯽ ﮐﻤﺘﺮي ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺷﻮد.
چكيده لاتين :
Introduction: Psychological reactance theory assumes that individuals, when receiving a message that threatens their freedom; react by resisting that message. Landlords tend to set their rental price themselves. At the time of the corona, when the government set a lower rate to increase annual rents; there was a good opportunity to test this assumption. There are two patterns of psychological reactance, one involving the threat to freedom (Dillard and Shen, 2005) and the other without it (Lindsay, 20005), that the present study aims to compare them.
Method: The research sample consisted of 395 landlords from Isfahan, Baharestan and Sepahan Shahr who were selected by convenience sampling method and responded to research tools including scales of attitude (Morgan and Miller, 2002), Behavioral Intention (Morgan, 2008), Freedom Threat (Dillard & Shen (2005); Lindsay (2005)), Psychological Reactance (Dillard & Shen, 2005), Reactance Restoration Scale (RRS) (Quick and Stephenson,2008), Source Appraisal (Miller et al., 2007), Anger (Dillard & Shen, 2005), and Negative Cognition (Dillard & Shen, 2005). Structural equation models (SEM) and item-response theory models (IRM) have been used to analyze the data.
Results: The results showed that Dillard and Shen's (2005) model had good fitness and had better fitness than Lindsey (2005) model. Psychological reactance, in addition to affecting other variables (motivation, attitude, and source of evaluation); It reproduces anger and negative cognition, and considering these two emotional and cognitive components improves the structural features of the model. If a psychological reactance is considered without these components; the structural model has a low fit.
Conclusion: Messengers are advised to formulate and present the message in a way that provokes less psychological reactance to achieve less anger and negative cognition.
