過去在防禦型印象管理策略前因的探討相當缺乏，應徵者端的前因文獻存在缺口，故本研究欲探討防禦型印象管理的三種策略：「道歉」、「開脫」與「合理化」策略的選擇因素包含應徵者的自我監控特質與國籍差異，並將五大人格特質納為本研究的控制變項。本研究採問卷法，透過紙本與網路兩種收集管道，總共收集了台灣與非台灣(歐洲)兩地共171份有效樣本，其中台灣為102份，非台灣(歐洲)則為69份。 本研究結果指出，應徵者在進行防禦型印象管理戰術選擇時會因國籍的不同而有差異，特別是對於「道歉」與「開脫」策略的影響，台灣樣本傾向使用前者，而歐洲樣本則傾向使用後者，然而「合理化」策略並未有差異；至於自我監控特質則僅影響「合理化」策略的使用，對「道歉」與「開脫」策略的使用並無影響。本研究結果同時提供面試官與應徵者如何解讀防禦型印象管理戰術；對企業而言，面試官並無法完全藉由應徵者使用的防禦型印象管理戰術推測其自我監控特質；對應徵者而言，合理化策略在研究結果中為一保守且安全的策略使用。 / In the past, there are lacks of researches studied about the antecedent of defensive impression management tactics. Especially the antecedents of applicants’ side are still unknown, and that is the purpose of this research. This research plans to explore the effects of applicants’ self-monitoring and nationality differences on the choices of applicants’ defensive impression management tactic. Paper and online questionnaire methods were conducted. 171 samples were been collected which were from Taiwan and non-Taiwan (Europe). There were 102 samples from Taiwan area and 69 samples were from non-Taiwan area which is Europe area. The results show that the nationality differences affect applicants’ choices of defensive management tactics, especially apology and excuse tactics. Samples from Taiwan area tend to choose apology tactic. However, samples from non-Taiwan (Europe) area prefer to choose excuse tactic in the same situation. And self-monitoring only affects justification tactic. These results can provide the guidance for both interviewers and applicants. For interviewers, it’s not suitable to infer applicant’s self-monitoring by the tactic he/she chose. And for applicants, justification tactic could be a safe option in such situation.