Edwards Jeffrey R, Cable Daniel M, Williamson Ian O, Lambert Lisa Schurer, Shipp Abbie J
Kenan-Flagler Business School, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 275993490, USA.
J Appl Psychol. 2006 Jul;91(4):802-27. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.802.
The authors distinguished 3 approaches to the study of perceived person-environment fit (P-E fit): (a) atomistic, which examines perceptions of the person and environment as separate entities; (b) molecular, which concerns the perceived comparison between the person and environment; and (c) molar, which focuses on the perceived similarity, match, or fit between the person and environment. Distinctions among these approaches have fundamental implications for theory, measurement, and the subjective experience of P-E fit, yet research has treated these approaches as interchangeable. This study investigated the meaning and relationships among the atomistic, molecular, and molar approaches to fit and examined factors that influence the strength of these relationships. Results showed that the relationships among the approaches deviate markedly from the theoretical logic that links them together. Supplemental analyses indicated that molar fit overlaps with affect and molecular fit gives different weight to atomistic person and environment information depending on how the comparison is framed. These findings challenge fundamental assumptions underlying P-E fit theories and have important implications for future research.
作者区分了三种研究感知到的人-环境匹配(P-E匹配)的方法:(a)原子主义方法,将人与环境的感知视为独立实体进行考察;(b)分子主义方法,关注人对自身与环境的感知比较;(c)整体主义方法,聚焦于人与环境之间感知到的相似性、匹配度或契合度。这些方法之间的区别对理论、测量以及P-E匹配的主观体验具有根本性影响,但研究却将这些方法视为可互换的。本研究调查了原子主义、分子主义和整体主义匹配方法之间的意义及关系,并考察了影响这些关系强度的因素。结果表明,这些方法之间的关系明显偏离了将它们联系在一起的理论逻辑。补充分析表明,整体主义匹配与情感重叠,而分子主义匹配根据比较的框架方式,对原子主义的个人和环境信息赋予不同权重。这些发现挑战了P-E匹配理论的基本假设,并对未来研究具有重要意义。