過去許多有關探討目標設定理論（Goal setting theory ）與期望理論（Expectancy theory）的研究大致上皆支持目標的難易和動機三因素乘積的大小的確會影響動機的 高低。然而，二者之間究竟何者才是影響動機的主要因素呢﹖二者是否是透過了相同 的途徑影響了動機，只是一個較直接，一個較間接﹖抑或是二者是透過了不同的途徑 影響了動機，所以當二者同時出現時，彼此之間會互相干擾﹖本研究的目的即在了解 究竟目標和動機三因素乘積何者才是影響動機的主要因素。本研究以政大學生１０８ 人為受試，操弄目標難易度（難、中、易）和動機三因素乘積的高低（高、中、低） ，以受試者在手眼協調測驗上的工作表現作為動機的指標，採用完全隨機的３＊３二 因子實驗設計。以二因子共變數分析的結果顯示，在工作表現上，主要效果及交互作 用皆不顯著，表示各組之間的動機沒有差異。一個可能的原因為目標和動機三因素乘 機彼此之間互相干擾，導致在動機上各組之間沒有差異。在討論中將詳細的說明此一 可能的解釋，並檢討在實驗進行中的可能產生的一些偏差及本研究所能適用的範圍。

薪資是影響求職者職缺選擇的重要因素之一，但是根據期望理論的觀點，職缺屬性彼此會產生互補效果，這對於資源有限的企業而言，意味著凸顯其他非金錢性之職缺屬性，應該能夠削弱低薪對於求職者職缺選擇的負面影響；此外，根據期望理論的論述，求職者個人特性亦會影響他 (她) 對職缺屬性的解讀，而影響求職者的職缺選擇。本研究以Barber、Daly、Giannantonio與Phillips (1994) 根據ERG理論為基礎所做的屬性分類，試圖探討關係類和成長類職缺屬性能否補償低薪對於求職者職缺選擇的影響，以提升求職者選取低薪職缺的可能性，同時亦探討求職者親和需求與成長需求於此間扮演的調節角色。 / 本研究以2 (關係類職缺屬性差距) ×2 (成長類職缺屬性差距) 受試者間實驗設計，依變項為低薪職缺「工作選擇決策」與「職缺接受意圖」，同時亦請受試自陳個人之親和需求與成長需求，共邀請151名某國立大學的應屆畢業生參與研究，並以階層迴歸分析與羅吉斯迴歸分析進行假設驗證，且輔以質化訪談佐證實證結果。研究結果發現，關係類職缺屬性差距或成長類職缺屬性差距，對於薪資水準皆產生顯著補償效果，亦即低薪職缺之關係類或成長類職缺屬性，愈優於高薪職缺的情況下，求職者愈會接受低薪職缺；此外，求職者之成長需求，也會調節成長類屬性與低薪職缺接受意圖和工作選擇決策間之關係；有別於期望理論的預測，本研究發現職缺屬性間並非為加成效果(Additive effect)，僅一類職缺屬性差距大時，即可補償薪資帶來的負面影響，而兩個職缺屬性皆差距大時，補償效果並未更強。最後，根據實證結果與訪談資料，本研究提出未來研究與管理建議。 / Pay-level has long been recognized as one of the most important job attributes that influence applicants' job acceptance intentions and choices. According to the expectancy theory, job attributes would compensate each other; in addition, applicants' individual differences would influence how they value job attributes. In terms of ERG theory's job attribute classification (Barber, Daly, Giannantonio & Phillips, 1994), the present study attempts to examine whether low-pay jobs with better relatedness and growth job attributes would foster applicants to choose them; as well as to investigate the moderating effects of the corresponding individual differences, need for affiliation and growth need strength, on the compensatory effects. / A 2×2 between-subject experimental design using low-pay job acceptance intentions and job choices as the dependent variables, were conducted with 151 undergraduate students who were pursuing jobs at the time of the data collection. Results of hierarchical regression, logistic regression and qualitative interviews showed that applicants were more willing to accept low-pay jobs than high-pay ones when low-pay jobs had better relatedness or growth job attributes; besides, applicants' growth need strength moderated the relationship between growth job attributes and the dependent variables. However, inconsistent with the expectance theory, addition analysis showed that job attributes did not affect applicants’ acceptance intentions and choices additively. That is, one better job attribute could have compensated low-pay's negative effect as effectively as two better job attribute had. Finally, based on the empirical results and qualitative data, suggestions for future research and managerial implications are discussed.

This paper investigates the investor trading behavior and the relationship between investor sentiment and stock returns. First we explore whether individual investors behave as the Disposition Effect stated — hold their losers too long while realize their winners too soon. Second, we apply four sentiment indicators — number of recommended stocks, margin purchase value, net fund redemption and odd-lot trade value — to examine relationship between investor sentiment and stock returns. We would like to see if past returns have anything to do with current sentiment, and if sentiment provides predictive power to future returns. First of all, from our analysis to over eight hundreds cash accounts trading records in two research periods, January to March and September to December in 2000, we found the Disposition Effect holds in average but not statistically. Second, the number of recommended stocks, weighted number of recommended stocks, margin purchase value, change in margin purchase value, net fund redemption and odd-lot trade value as proxies of investor sentiment are good at measuring the effect of past 4-week and 26-week returns on sentiment. Third, the margin purchase value, net fund redemption and odd-lot trade value provide predictive power to future 26-week returns in our study, which also implies there is likely underlying mean-reversion within half year during the research period. 　Finally, exploiting the change in margin purchase value as proxy of investor sentiment, we found the past 4-week returns volatility is inversely related with the indicator. That is, investors are scared on facing with high returns volatility.