京都大学 / 新制・論文博士 / 博士(文学) / 乙第13592号 / 論文博第672号 / 京都大学大学院文学研究科思想文化学専攻 / (主査)教授 児玉 聡, 教授 伊勢田 哲治, 教授 大河内 泰樹 / 学位規則第4条第2項該当 / Doctor of Letters / Kyoto University / DGAM

在這個後現代氛圍籠罩下的西方當代文學、藝術與哲學界，一再被處理卻始終無法或者是不願達成共識的議題是：究竟什麼是後現代？後現代與現代性之間是否有聯繫？其聯繫為何？這個問題牽涉的範圍及層面的廣泛，及其錯綜複雜的程度，單從哈柏瑪斯（Jürgen Habermas）對德希達（Jacques Derrida）的批評中 ，就能夠看出在這個問題中所遭遇到的艱難與困窘。對於後現代是否延續了現代性的精神？是不是一種對現代性的質疑、批判甚至否定？抑或是試圖在現代性陰影的籠罩下嘗試另循一番出路的企圖？德希達作為後現代陣營中與現代性對仗的第一線代表人物，是不是真的能落入被貼上「後現代」標籤的思潮中？即使他本人並不認同能夠將他的論述視為是後現代的 ，那麼我們該以什麼方式面對他所提出來的解構（deconstruction）？是不是解構與後現代有若干不合符節之處？那麼又該如何看待解構對於當代文化思潮所造成的衝擊與影響？ 可以確定的是，如果因為將後現代視為是一齣無的放矢，或是純粹在亂開玩笑的鬧劇 ，而將解構同樣視為一場大玩雙關語的語言遊戲 ，那麼德希達會認為這是因為對他所提出的主張尚未有足夠的了解，便開始進行批判時才會出現的回應 ，這種情形非但對德希達是不公平，作為學術研究而言甚至可以說是不負責任的 。然而，是不是有一種方式可以讓我們負起閱讀德希達的責任？如果有，我們該以何種方式閱讀德希達的作品？而，如果閱讀德希達是我們無法肩負的責任，德希達的論述又能為我們帶來了什麼樣的啟發？不論如何，這個問題的解答唯有通過進入德希達所談論解構的脈絡之中，與德希達及其著作對話才有可能找到若干蛛絲馬跡。若是談到德希達的思想，往往直覺的會將其與解構畫上等號，然而，解構是不是真的足以標示德希達的論述？是否可以將德希達的哲學稱為解構主義？甚至於將解構視為是德希達的思想核心？德希達斬釘截鐵的告訴我們：「我使用它〔解構〕並且以某種方式強調它，但是對我而言它並不是主要的一個字。」 這不禁讓我們好奇在解構之外，超出解構所能訴說的一切，是不是還有些什麼是值得我們在閱讀德希達時需要去特別留意？ 本論文寫作的動機即是：嘗試經由聚焦於德希達所提出的一種嶄新的自我與他者的倫理關係中對於責任（responsibility）的論述，分析其著作中所透露的思路與邏輯。在本論文中，不但嘗試理解德希達所引發的解構風潮，更試圖尋找那個隱藏在解構背後，一個在解構所面對無法合理化的界線上所存在的合理化解釋。當然，這並不是要替解構找一個基礎，而是試圖探索解構何以如此難以言喻，甚至無法言喻。並由此深入德希達對當前不論是哲學、文學、政治，經濟、宗教甚至女權及社會運動等所進行的反思及影響，說明解構在其所掀起令人無法忽視的聲浪中，究竟給予了我們什麼樣的責任及為我們帶來什麼樣的啟發？

本研究是國內少數以公民參與的觀點，探討環境正義落實，並以實際政策規劃佐以驗證。過去台灣公民參與政策規劃實例不多，甚至公民參與政策規劃意願薄弱，因為許多民眾不相信政府會採納他們的意見，總保持旁觀態度。同時，國內政策規劃模式並沒有提供公民參與機制，民眾不熟悉政策制定流程，也沒有相對專業背景，造成雙向溝通地方座談會流於形式。 政策規劃應以民眾為最主要利害關係人考量，利害關係人的意見應在政策規劃時就須納入考量並給予相對回應，以獲得政策合法性及追求政策支持度。環境正義的落實必須依賴政策的落實，同時也提供利害關係人相對的資訊，以供作出最有利判斷，否則推動環境正義的行動，僅淪為空談。本研究以臺北縣新莊市中港大排整治個案為研究背景，將規劃過程政府與當地民眾如何互動，詳實記錄並分析。冀望透過本計畫執行，能提供未來政府決策參考。同時能激起民眾公民意識覺醒，提升公民參與政策規劃意願，進而落實環境正義。 關鍵字：環境正義、利害關係人、公民參與 / This research is one of the few researches which aims to discuss the application of environment justice and verify it with a real example of policy planning from the point of view of citizens participation. In the past, there are few examples of citizen participating in policy-making. Moreover, citizens are not willing to take part in public policy-making, for the public doesn’t believe the government will adopt their opinions, is not familiar with the process of policy-making and doesn’t have professional knowledge about policy-making. As a result, the local forums between the government officials and the public cannot produce positive outputs. Policy planning should regard the public as main stakeholder and the opinions of the “stakeholders” should be taken into account to get the legitimacy of policies and their support form the public. The application of environment justice depends on the application of policy. The government should offer the “stakeholder” necessary information so that the public is able to make the best judgment. Otherwise, the actions to carry out environmental justice will be in vain. Taking the renovation of Zhong-Kang Drainage channel in Xin Zhuang as a example, this research records and analyzes how people in Xin Zhuang interact with the government during the process of policy-making in details. This research aims to become a model for the government in future by the execution of the project. Meanwhile, the research would like to activate the awareness of citizenship and increase the public’s willingness to participate policy in planning and carry out the justice of environment. Key word: environmental justice, stakeholder, citizen participation

依憲法第81條規定，法官為終身職，非受刑事或懲戒處分或禁治產之宣告，不得免職。非依法律，不得停職、轉任或減俸。復依司法人員人事條例第41條規定，實任司法官合於公務人員退休法退休規定，而自願退休時，除退休金外，並另加退養金；其辦法由司法院會同考試院、行政院以命令定之。又依司法官退養金給與辦法規定略以，未滿60歲者，給與5%。60歲以上未滿65歲者，給與10%。但身體衰弱，致不能勝任職務，經公立醫院證明者，給與60%。65歲以上未滿70歲者，給與140%。70歲以上者，給與5%。 目前於「司法人員人事條例」及「司法官退養金給與辦法」規定，司法官滿70歲應停止辦案，若在65歲至70歲間自願退休，可加領140%退養金；逾70歲未退休，等到退休時，只能加領5%退養金，亦即實任法官合於公務人員退休法規定，自願退休時，除依規定發給退休金外，另依司法官退養金給與辦法規定，按一次退休金總額或月退休金數額，發給一次退養金或月退養金，最高加發上開金額140%。現行司法官退養金給與比例係按司法官退休時之年齡作區分，並未考量司法官任職年資，恐有違平等原則。突顯我國司法官退養制度上出現三個問題，第一為我國司法官退養制度之公平合理性；第二為依年齡區分，做得愈久，加發退養金卻領得愈少；第三為停止辦案之司法官，仍領有司法官之給與，有違公平正義原則。並以羅爾斯的正義論觀點來看司法官退養制度是否符合公平正義原則。 藉由上述研究動機及問題，本論文以文獻分析法和德菲法為研究方法，通過專家一致性意見，探討「我國司法官退養制度」之合理性議題進行問卷。經由三輪德菲法問卷結果的反覆修正，最終司法官身職定義、優遇制度、退養制度、公平正義等四個面向，探討我國司法官退養制度之合理性。最後，本論文在我國司法官退養制度之實務不合理方面，提出建議修法，以期能提供政府規劃人事制度之參考與借鑒。 關鍵詞：退養金制度、司法官、正義論 / According to article 81 of ROC Constitutional Law, Judge shall hold office for life, no judge shall be removed from office unless he has been guilty of a criminal offense or subjected to disciplinary action, or declared to be under interdiction. No judge shall, except in accordance with law, be suspended from office, transferred, or liable to salary cuts. Further according to article 41 of The Statute For Judiciary Personnel, while substantive judge is conform to Civil Service Retirement Act and retire voluntarily, in addition to pension, also added retirement pension; such regulation may be issued by an order of Judicial Yuan jointly with Examination Yuan and Executive Yuan. Again, according to Regulations For Judge Retirement Pension, 5% for those who under 60-year-old. 10% for those who above 60-year-old and under 65-year-old. However, those who have a failure in health, therefore, are not qualified for this position, 60% for those who have obtained the public hospital certificate.140% for those who above 65-year-old and under 70-year-old. 5% for those who above 70%. According to The Statue For Judiciary Personnel and Regulations of Pension for Judges, judges should cease to handle cases after he or she arrives 70 years old. Judges who apply for retirement between 60 and 70 years old are eligible to have 140% pension scheme. 5% pension scheme is issued to those who choose to retire after 70. Meanwhile, based on the rules of Civil Service Retirement Act, officers volunteer to retire will be issued an amount of pension either once and for all or on a monthly basis. Apart from this, it is ruled by Regulations of Pension of Judges, pension scheme should be issued once and for all or on a monthly basis, plus 140% pension scheme, whenever possible. However, currently pension schemes for judges are different from retirement ages, instead of seniority since it might fail to meet constitutional requirements such as the principle of equality.also highlighted three questions appeared in our judge retirement system, first is the equity and reason of judge retirement system; the second is distinguishing from age, the longer of the employment is, the less of retirement pension get; the third is judge suspending case, still have judge payment, against the principle of equity and justice. And at the point of Theory of Justice of John Rawls, whether Judge Retirement system is conform to justice and reason principle. By way of the abovementioned research motive and question, the research method of this thesis is based on documentary analysis method and Delphi Technique, through unity opinion of expert, probe into the reasonable topic of “judge retirement system of our country” and to proceed questionnaire. After repeatedly amendment of three run Delphi method questionnaire result, finally, four directions of definition of judge holding office for life、system of treating with preference、retirement system、reason and justice, etc., to probe into the reason of judge retirement system of our country. Finally, this thesis raises law amendment suggestion at the aspect of unreasonable practice of judge retirement system of our country, and expect may provide reference and example to government regarding planning personnel system. Key words: Retirement Pension System、Judge、Theory of Justice

政府採購法下之工程採購較他類採購規模大，契約金額高，且因履約期長，履約之不可預期性增加，常造成履約過程中，對於契約無法明確釐清之事項及責任，在機關為維護公共利益，而廠商為爭取合理利潤，雙方立場不一致情形下，無法有效解決問題，遂產生履約爭議，而須透過履約爭議處理制度來解決雙方之紛爭。而仲裁係履約爭議處理的一種快速有效解決爭議之方式，由雙方當事人各自推舉仲裁人，再共推一名主任仲裁人組成仲裁庭解決雙方之紛爭。然現行情況機關多抗拒仲裁，不信任仲裁，質疑仲裁程序之公正性，進而提出撤銷仲裁判斷之訴訟，但幾乎皆遭法院駁回，機關最終必須接受仲裁判斷結果。本研究針對公共工程採購仲裁爭議案件，以深度訪談實際參與仲裁庭審理過程之機關與廠商兩造，就整個仲裁過程是否以公平公正、符合程序正義，有效合理的解決紛爭，並探究為何機關提起撤銷仲裁判斷之訴訟之原因。研究結果發現機關質疑仲裁制度公正性的原因係對工程採購履約爭議制度不熟悉，且仲裁人在處理過程有代理人之行為，加上機關的律師不若廠商的律師積極、仲裁結果輸多贏少，導致不信任仲裁。而機關除認為仲裁結果不公正外，又為避免遭受圖利廠商質疑遂提起撤銷仲裁判斷訴訟。因此研究建議機關可選任由具工程專業背景之資深公務人員擔任仲裁人，並提供聘任律師合理費用以提升機關參與仲裁之信心與意願。 另公開工程採購爭議仲裁判斷書供社會大眾閱覽、加強仲裁人訓練、推廣仲裁、相關主計、政風及審計等監督單位應尊重採購專業人員之判斷等建議，使當事人更能接受仲裁判斷結果。 / Under Government Procurement Law, the scale and amount of public construction procurement is usually much larger. The increased unexpected factors due to longer compliance period, and different standpoint from both sides could rise the possibility of disputes, which should be solved with a more systematic way. Arbitration, which solves disputes by selecting arbitrators and forming an arbitral tribunal, is a fast and efficient way to deal with disputes from public construction procurement. However, presently, most government agencies distrust arbitration and often file out a revocation of an arbitral, which usually be dismissed by the court. At last, government agencies have to accept the outcome of the arbitration.This thesis studies the cases of public construction procurement disputes. By interviewing both sides of the actual participants, the fairness, effectiveness and justifiability of an arbitral tribunal is carefully examines. The result indicates that the major reasons why government agencies distrust arbitration include the followings: First, government agencies are often unfamiliar with the system of public construction procurement arbitration. Second, arbitrators could assign delegates. Third, attorneys of government agencies could be less aggressive than that of contractors. Forth, government agencies often lose in arbitrations. Moreover, government agencies could file out a revocation of an arbitral preventing being suspected to be in favor to contractors. It is suggested by this study that government agencies could select senior staffs from government agencies with engineering background as arbitrators and provide them with reasonable subsidy. Other suggestions includes: arbitration award be opened for public reference, enhancing arbitrator's training, promoting arbitrator, other divisions of government agencies respect public construction procurement professionalism, et cetera.

近年來，因房價急速攀升，居住困難的問題在台灣各都會區越形嚴重，為緩解此一現象，保護人民居住的權利，只租不賣的社會住宅成為政府住宅政策的焦點之一，且受到社會大眾的廣泛討論。本文使用文獻分析法爬梳台灣歷來的住宅政策，以及主導這些政策的意識型態，發掘形塑台灣社會住宅論述的主要成因。並對房地產業從業人員、民間從事土地與住宅之社會運動者及政府相關部門公職人員進行深度訪談，以不同角度交互印證前述文獻分析的結果，同時，以台北市和新北市為例，探討台灣實際執行社會住宅政策以來，其發展的現況、面臨的困境與批評，以及可能的解決之道。研究結果顯示，台灣社會住宅論述形成的原因，是由於台灣既有的住宅持有分配不均與住宅市場失靈，造成人民居住權受到壓迫，進而產生一種新型態的住宅提供之訴求，此訴求可視為對原有自由主義市場經濟主宰住宅分配的反動。台灣目前主要推行社會住宅政策的區域為居住困難情形最嚴重的台北市與新北市，其面臨的主要批評有數量少、租金高、租期短、承租對象年齡侷限等，而在政策實施上面臨的困境則有興建經費不足、政府資源分配不均、周邊社區鄰避效應處理與營運管理維護等問題。政府必須著眼於改善現行社會住宅政策的困境與批評，方能使社會住宅政策更臻完善，並能藉此達到落實居住正義之效。 / In recent years, the dramatic increase in house price has led to difficulties for dwellings to serve their own housing needs in the metropolitan area in Taiwan. Social housing therefore becomes a vital policy, in hope of easing the stress on the difficulties of housing needs and moreover, reserving the civilian’s right of habitation. This study is composed of two major parts: literature review and interview. The literature review provides the background and framework of housing policies in the past, identifies the ideologies that formulated the policies, and concludes the main factors that develop the discourse of social housing in Taiwan. The second part of the study reinforces the attributions of the literature review based on the statement and experience of the interviewees. The group of interviewees consists of chief executive form a construction company, real estate agent, social activists with awareness on land and housing issues, and civil servants involved in social housing affairs. The different perspectives presented by the interviewees explain the development of social housing, bring up the criticism and predicament on the topic, and contribute in discovering solutions for the difficulties of housing needs. The findings of this study indicate that housing inequality and housing market failure has underlain the discourse of social housing. The exploitation on the right of habitation has raised the appeal for social housing, which can also be suggested as a counteraction to the housing distribution dominated by free market. In Taiwan, social housing policy is mainly enacted in Taipei City and New Taipei City, which suffer most from the difficulties of housing needs. However, there are drawbacks that impede the promotion of this policy: lack of fund for construction, inequality on governmental resource, NIMBY in the community, and maintenance for sustaining operation. In addition, arguments about insufficient availability, unaffordable rent, short tenure and age restrict on tenants are also powerful against the policy. To conclude, the government should try to ensure that the system is designed in the way to minimize the disadvantages, which merits achieving social housing policy aim: reserving the civilian’s right to adequate housing.

本文以邵晉涵《爾雅正義》「因聲求義」243條詞條作為研究對象，全文共分六章，首先探討「同族詞」的定義、研究概況以及和「同源詞」之間的概念區分；其次整理、系聯《爾雅正義》的同族詞，並以現代語言學的角度加以分析，從中構擬出103組同族詞的詞根形式以及15組同族聯綿詞，按照李方桂先生的上古二十二韻部加以排列；接著藉由系聯的成果，進而分析《爾雅正義》同族詞所表現的「語音關係類型」和「詞義關係類型」，並就整體來觀察《爾雅正義》在同族詞研究上的貢獻與局限。以下分別論述各章大要： 第一章首先論述本文的「研究動機與目的」，其次介紹本文所使用的「研究方法」和「研究步驟」，第三部分是「文獻探討」，包括邵晉涵《爾雅正義》的研究和《爾雅》注本及其詞源研究兩個方面，並且對於前人研究的成果作全面性的檢討。 第二章分為四個小節：第一節主要論述邵晉涵的生平背景和個人著作，第二節則介紹《爾雅正義》的成書背景和現存的兩個版本，第三節以黃侃先生〈爾雅略說〉對於《爾雅正義》所區分的六大體例舉例說明之，第四節主要論述《爾雅正義》在「因聲求義」的理論和實踐上，可分為「破假借」、「明轉語」、「辨連語」、「別重語」、「系聯同族詞和同族聯綿詞」和「探求事物得名之由來」六個方面。尤其在「明轉語」方面，筆者全面性統計《爾雅正義》一書所使用「因聲求義」的詞條，總計243條(包含單音詞212條和複音詞31條)，使用「轉語」的術語更高達45種。 第三章首先論述「同族詞」的定義，並引用現代學者對於「同源詞」和「同族詞」是否區分的看法以及本文的立場。其次回顧「漢語同族詞」研究的歷史，主要是從「傳統詞源學」(聲訓說、右文說、語轉說)和「現、當代詞源學」兩方面著手。最後介紹本文系聯《爾雅正義》「同族詞」的判斷原則和分析依據，原則上根據「音義兼顧原則」，語音關係上採用李方桂先生的上古音系統，並分為「音同」、「音近」和「音轉」三大類；詞義關係上則使用胡繼明先生「詞義相同」和「詞義相關」的分類，再加上筆者所獨立「同族字和同族詞之重疊部分」一類，總共分為三類。 第四章是本文研究的重點，首先全面分析、考察《爾雅正義》「因聲求義」212條單音詞的詞條，並且系聯出103組同族詞組，按照李方桂先生上古二十二韻部加以排列。其次再探討《爾雅正義》「因聲求義」31條複音詞的詞條，進而系聯出15組同族聯綿詞。 第五章是根據本文所系聯的103組同族詞組，分析《爾雅正義》同族詞的語音關係和詞義關係；在語音關係上，主要分為「音同」、「音近」和「音轉」(聲轉、韻轉、聲韻皆轉)三類，在詞義關係上，則分為「同族字和同族詞之重疊部分」、「詞義相同」(本義和本義相同、本義和引申義相同、引申義和引申義相同)和「詞義相關」(具有相同特徵、具有相同特質、特指與泛指)三類，最後再加以統計分析各小類所占的百分比例。 第六章分為三個小節：第一節論述《爾雅正義》在同族詞研究上的貢獻，主要是從「理論層面」(存古義、廣古訓、存古音)、「方法層面」(系源法)和「實踐層面」(系聯同族詞、涉及同族字和同族詞之重疊部分、系聯同族聯綿詞)三方面著手。第二節探究《爾雅正義》在同族詞研究上的局限，可分為「同音詞和同族詞相混」、「同義詞和同族詞相混」、「本字、通假字和同族詞相混」、「異體字和同族詞相混」和「術語使用的任意性」五大缺失。第三節則是討論本文尚待研究之處，未來將擴展至其他漢語的文獻材料，找出相對應的藏緬詞語，建立漢藏同源詞表和形態類型，最終目標是希望能夠重新建構原始漢藏語的形式。 最後希望本文探討《爾雅正義》詞條類聚群分的詞語關係，分析歸納其義衍音轉的漢語詞族，可以初步了解邵晉涵《爾雅正義》中同族詞的性質和內容，並且進一步還原《爾雅正義》在漢語詞源史上的地位和成就。

本論文重要的目的，瞭解捷克轉型正義的特色與淨化法的施行。捷克轉型正義，發生在蘇聯解體、中東歐國家政治、經濟轉型的脈絡下。去共化和處理過去共遺緒問題，是中東歐國家轉型正義的重要任務，淨化法在如此政治環境下產生。捷克的淨化政策，由於國內政治非制度淨化，加上民主選舉過程，導致黑函滿天飛，所造成嚴重的政治問題，因而訂定的立法規範。這樣的背景下，淨化政策是一種特殊、臨時的政策工具。反映出當時轉型政治所面臨的困難，以及共黨政治轉型到民主政治之間，體系轉換的矛盾。此外，淨化政策也代表，當時捷克政治環境危機的解決方式。回到歷史的脈絡下來看，淨化政策是一種人事改革的手段，也是推動整體改革的基礎。解構舊有的權力結構，讓新民主有機會發展。 淨化政策在施行上，仍有許多爭議，包括可能侵害個人政治權力，以及被認為是一種對於共黨的報復手段，但淨化政策最重要的目標，是為建立特殊時期的改革基礎，也沒有具體的資料顯示，淨化政策會造成政治民主發展的傷害，相反的，淨化政策的施行得當，對於新民主的發展是有助益。 / The most important purpose of this thesis is to understand the characteristics of the Czech transitional justice and Lustration Law. The Czech, as a Central and Eastern European countries, transitional justice occurred in the Post-Soviet with the political, economic restructuring context. Both "de-communism" and "the dealing with the past" is important task of the Transitional Justice in Central and Eastern European countries, and the Lustration Law implement in this background. Czech Lustration Law is result from wild lustration, because of democratic electoral system, leading to blackmail over the place, caused a serious political problem. Therefore, the legislators decided to make the law. Based on the above, the Lustration Law is a special, temporary policy tool. The situation reflects the challenges of political transition, and the communist political transition to a democratic system, is facing tremendous contradiction. In addition, the Lustration policy also represents a solution choice of the Czech political environment crisis. Lustration policy is a kind of a personnel reform policy, and promotes the overall reform. Destroy the former power structure, so that the new democracy has a chance to develop. Examining the Lustration policy, there is a lot of controversy. Including it may infringe the personal political right, and it’s considered as retaliation to the former political elite. However, the Lustration policies the most important goal is to establish the basis of a special period of reform. There is no specific evidence to show that Lustration Law will result in damage to the development of political democracy. On the other hand, lustration policy is implemented appropriately; it would be beneficial for the development of new democracy.

「氣候變遷」此一名詞出現時，大多被認為是人類活動對氣候所造成之影響與後果，1988年成立的《聯合國跨政府間氣候變遷小組》（Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change of the UN , IPCC）每六年發表一次《全球氣候評估報告》，於2001年第3次氣候評估報告即點出，未來之氣候變遷將不再侷限於評估人為活動對氣候的影響，氣候自然變化同為評估重點。而最近一次在2013年發表第五次氣候評估報告則指出，預估到本世纪末全球地表温度將持續升高1.5至2.0℃，該報告指出有95%的可能性，人類活動是自1950年代以来地球暖化之主要原因。 科學家們早已一再提出警告，氣候變遷將導致水災、旱災、沙漠化、海島陸沉、糧食危機、氣候難民、戰爭、生態浩劫等各種無法逆轉的事件層出不窮，本論文將就因應氣候變遷而衍生之綠色專利審查機制，得以快速取得綠色專利權，進而可適度抑制溫室現象之綠色產品將大量出現，與智慧財產權有關之綠色專利亦將被大量運用。人們可盡一己之力來為減緩地球暖化做出貢獻，徹底實現世代正義，於此同時綠色經濟所帶來之商機亦將無可限量。 關鍵字：氣候變遷、智慧財產權、綠色專利審查機制、世代正義

過往職場負向互動的研究多關注加害者與加害行為，但負向互動對於受害者的衝擊則該端視受害者本身的屬性與主觀理解而有不同，而職場受害試圖從受害者的角度來理解職場間的負向互動。本研究希望能探討個體的受害者敏感性與職場受害的關聯，以及職場受害對個體的幸福感及離職意圖造成的影響，此外更進一步探討知覺組織正義氣候可能對受害者敏感性與職場受害關係的調節效果。本研究採時間間隔的方式，以問卷調查法施測，共得222份有效樣本，研究結果發現受害者敏感性能預測職場受害，而職場受害能負向預測幸福感以及正向預測離職意圖，但是知覺組織正義氣候對於受害者敏感性與職場受害關聯的調節效果則未獲支持。最後，針對本研究之結果進行討論，並說明理論貢獻、管理意涵、研究限制以及未來建議。