Refine
Keywords
- Arbeitszufriedenheit (1)
- Benutzerverhalten (1)
- Beruflicher Kontakt (1)
- Führung (1)
- Führung durch Selbstführung (1)
- Hedonic (1)
- Hedonisch (1)
- Innerbetriebliche Kooperation (1)
- Intergruppenprozesse (1)
- Justification (1)
Technical products have become more than practical tools to us. Mobile phones, for example, are a constant companion in daily life. Besides purely pragmatic tasks, they fulfill psychological needs such as relatedness, stimulation, competence, popularity, or security. Their potential for the mediation of positive experience makes interactive products a rich source of pleasure. Research acknowledged this: in parallel to the hedonic/utilitarian model in consumer research, Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) researchers broadened their focus from mere task-fulfillment (i.e., the pragmatic) to a holistic view, encompassing a product's ability for need-fulfillment and positive experience (i.e., the hedonic). Accordingly, many theoretical models of User Experience (UX) acknowledge both dimensions as equally important determinants of a product's appeal: pragmatic attributes (e.g., usability) as well as hedonic attributes (e.g., beauty). In choice situations, however, people often overemphasize the pragmatic, and fail to acknowledge the hedonic. This phenomenon may be explained by justification. Due to their need for justification, people attend to the justifiability of hedonic and pragmatic attributes rather than to their impact on experience. Given that pragmatic attributes directly contribute to task-fulfillment, they are far easier to justify than hedonic attributes. People may then choose the pragmatic over the hedonic, despite a true preference for the hedonic. This can be considered a dilemma, since people choose what is easy to justify and not what they enjoy the most. The present thesis presents a systematic exploration of the notion of a hedonic dilemma in the context of interactive products.
A first set of four studies explored the assumed phenomenon. Study 1 (N = 422) revealed a reluctance to pay for a hedonic attribute compared to a pragmatic attribute. Study 2 (N = 134) demonstrated that people (secretly) prefer a more hedonic product, but justify their choice by spurious pragmatic advantages. Study 3 (N = 118) confronted participants with a trade-off between hedonic and pragmatic quality. Even though the prospect of receiving a hedonic product was related to more positive affect, participants predominantly chose the pragmatic, especially those with a high need for justification. This correlation between product choice and perceived need for justification lent further support to the notion that justification lies at the heart of the dilemma. Study 4 (N = 125) explored affective consequences and justifications provided for hedonic and pragmatic choice. Data on positive affect suggested a true preference for the hedonic - even among those who chose the pragmatic product.
A second set of three studies tested different ways to reduce the dilemma by manipulating justification. Manipulations referred to the justifiability of attributes as well as the general need for justification. Study 5 (N = 129) enhanced the respective justifiability of hedonic and pragmatic choice by ambiguous product information, which could be interpreted according to latent preferences. As expected, enhanced justifiability led to an increase in hedonic but not in pragmatic choice. Study 6 (N = 178) manipulated the justifiability of hedonic choice through product information provided by a "test report", which suggested hedonic attributes as legitimate. Again, hedonic choice increased with increased justifiability. Study 7 (N = 133) reduced the general need for justification by framing a purchase as gratification. A significant positive effect of the gratification frame on purchase rates occurred for a hedonic but not for a pragmatic product.
Altogether, the present studies revealed a desire for hedonic attributes, even in interactive products, which often are still understood as purely pragmatic "tools". But precisely because of this predominance of pragmatic quality, people may hesitate to give in to their desire for hedonic quality in interactive products - at least, as long as they feel a need for justification. The present findings provide an enhanced understanding of the complex consequences of hedonic and pragmatic attributes, and indicate a general necessity to expand the scope of User Experience research to the moment of product choice. Limitations of the present studies, implications for future research as well as practical implications for design and marketing are discussed.
The present thesis investigates attitudes and prosocial behavior between workgroups from a social identity and intergroup contact perspective. Based on the Common In-group Identity Model (CIIM; Gaertner & Dvoidio, 2000), it is hypothesized that "optimal" conditions for contact (Allport, 1954) create a common identity at the organizational level which motivates workgroups to cooperate and show organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) rather than intergroup bias. Predictions based on the CIIM are extended with hypotheses derived from the In-group Projection Model (IPM; Mummendey & Wenzel, 1999) and the Self-Categorization Model of Group Norms (Terry & Hogg, 1996). Hypotheses are tested with data from N1 = 281 employees of N2 = 49 different workgroups and their workgroup managers of a German mail-order company (Study 1). Results indicate that group- and individual-level contact conditions are predictive of lower levels of intergroup bias and higher levels of cooperation and helping behavior. A common in-group representation mediates the effect on out-group attitudes and intergroup cooperation. In addition, the effect of a common in-group representation on intergroup bias is moderated by relative prototypicality, as predicted by the IPM, and the effect of prosocial group norms on helping behavior is moderated by workgroup identification, as predicted by the Self-Categorization Model of Group Norms. A longitudinal study with Ntotal = 57 members of different student project groups replicates the finding that contact under "optimal" conditions reduces intergroup bias and increases prosocial behavior between organizational groups. However, a common in-group representation is not found to mediate this effect in Study 2. Initial findings also indicate that individual-level variables, such as helping behavior toward members of another workgroup, may be better accounted for by variables at the same level of categorization (cf. Haslam, 2004). Thus, contact in a context that makes personal identities of workgroup members salient (i.e., decategorization) may be more predictive of interpersonal prosocial behavior, while contact in a context that makes workgroup identities salient (i.e., categorization) may be more predictive of intergroup prosocial behavior (cf. Tajfel, 1978). Further data from Study 1 support such a context-specific effect of contact between workgroups on interpersonal and intergroup prosocial behavior, respectively. In the last step, a temporal integration of the contact contexts that either lead to decategorization, categorization, or recategorization are examined based on the Longitudinal Contact Model (Pettigrew, 1998). A first indication that a temporal sequence from decategorization via categorization to recategorization may be particularly effective in fostering intergroup cooperation is obtained with data from Study 2. In order to provide a heuristic model for research on prosocial behavior between workgroups, findings are integrated into a Context-Specific Contact Model. The model proposes specific effects of contact in different contexts on prosocial behavior at different levels of categorization. Possible mediator and moderator processes are suggested. A number of implications for theory, future research and the management of relations between workgroups are discussed.
Bislang mangelt es an Forschung zur Führung durch Selbstführung, ein laut Manz und Sims (2007) für die modernen Arbeitsbedingungen des 21. Jahrhunderts adäquater Führungsansatz. Zudem findet dieses Führungsverhalten in der Praxis bisher noch wenig Verbreitung (vgl. Butzmann, 2008; Jilg, 2010). Dies verdeutlicht, dass ein erheblicher Bedarf an Förderung und Training von Führung durch Selbstführung besteht. In diesem Zusammenhang wären zum einen Kenntnisse darüber von Vorteil, welche Eigenschaften und Kompetenzen für den Erwerb dieses Führungsverhalten prädisponieren. Zum anderen wäre eine empirische Fundierung der Erfolgsrelevanz von Führung durch Selbstführung interessant.
Anliegen vorliegender Arbeit ist, hierzu einen Beitrag zu leisten. Auf eignungsspezifischer Seite wurden das unternehmerische Eignungspotential sowie die individuelle Selbstführungskompetenz untersucht. Auf erfolgsspezifischer Seite wurde Führung durch Selbstführung sowohl mit dem objektiven Unternehmenserfolg als auch mit der Arbeitszufriedenheit und dem Wohlbefinden, als Indikatoren des subjektiven Unternehmenserfolgs, in Beziehung gesetzt. Die Untersuchung erfolgte an einer Stichprobe von N = 102 beruflich selbstständige Personen. Aufgrund der sehr homogenen Stichprobenzusammensetzung in Bezug auf das unternehmerische Eignungspotential sowie einer eingeschränkten Messqualität einer der Skalen zur Erfassung von Führung durch Selbstführung konnten einige der aufgestellten Hypothesen nicht bestätigt werden. Ein explorativ getestetes Modell, aus welchem diese kritischen Skalen bzw. Variablen entfernt wurden, weist allerdings einen sehr guten ModellFit auf und bestätigt weitestgehend die postulierten Zusammenhänge zwischen der individuellen Selbstführungskompetenz, Führung durch Selbstführung sowie den subjektiven und objektiven Erfolgsindikatoren. Zu beachten ist, dass dieses Modell aufgrund seines explorativen Charakters erst nach seiner erfolgreichen Replizierung als bestätigt angesehen werden darf, wobei die gefundenen Ergebnisse zu weiterführenden Untersuchungen im Bereich der Führung-durch-Selbstführungsforschung ermutigen.
