养老保险15年补缴:请高手帮我翻译成中文 急用

来源:百度文库 编辑:杭州交通信息网 时间:2024/04/29 21:04:38
Surprisingly, the study of self-defeating influence behavior by leaders has received relatively little systematic
attention from social psychologists. A primary aim of the present paper, accordingly, is to address
this gap in our understanding. In particular, I examine some of the possible determinants and dynamics
of self-defeating influence behaviors by leaders. The paper is organized as follows. First, I offer a definition
of self-defeating influence behavior. Second, I identify some of the different forms that self-defeating
influence behaviors take. I then present a social cognitive model of self-defeating influence behavior.
According to this model, leaders can be conceptualized as strategic actors who monitor or audit their
influence transactions with the aim of realizing their aims or objectives. I then examine some social cognitive
processes that lead this auditing process astray, fostering misperception and miscalculation. I next
consider some of the psychological and social dynamics that contribute to the persistence of self-defeating
influence behaviors. Again, the persistence of such behavior seems puzzling: if experienced leaders
receive feedback that their influence attempts are failing, why do they not change their course of action?
Why do they persist in their path to folly? I close the paper by discussing briefly some of the implications
of the framework for our understanding of self-defeating influence behavior.
Conceptualizing Self-Defeating Influence Behavior
Historically, the scholarly study of self-defeating behavior has stood at the intersection of social psychology
and clinical psychology (e.g., Berglas & Baumeister, 1993). Baumeister & Scher (1988) provided one
of the first comprehensive literature reviews. They defined self-defeating behavior as “any deliberate
or intentional behavior that has clear, definitely or probably negative effects on the self or on the self’s
projects” (3). They go on to posit that the behavior “must be intentional, although harm to self did not
have to be the intended or primary goal of the action” (3).
不要用翻译软件翻译的,谢谢.

令人惊讶的,领袖的弄巧成拙的影响力行为的研究有相对地收到小的有系统的
来自社会的心理学者的注意。 现在的纸一种主要的目标,因此, 是到住址
我们的理解这个缝隙。 特别地,我调查一些可能的决定因素和动力学
弄巧成拙的影响力,领袖的行为。 纸依下列各项被组织。 首先,我提供一种定义
弄巧成拙的影响力,行为。 其次,我识别一些不同的表格那弄巧成拙的
影响力行为拿。 我然后呈现弄巧成拙的影响力行为的一个社会的认知模型。
依照这个模型,领袖可能是 conceptualized 如检测,或稽查的策略演员他们的
用~影响交易了解他们的目标或目的的目标。 我然后调查一些社会的认知
程序领引这个收支检查迷途地处理,养育 misperception 和 miscalculation。 我然后
考虑一些那心理学的和考虑对持续有助益的社会动力学弄巧成拙的
影响行为。 再一次,如此的行为持续像是使迷惑: 是否富有经验的领袖
接受回应他们的影响力尝试正在失败, 他们为什麽不变化他们的行动课程?
他们为什么坚持对愚蠢的他们路径? 我藉由简短的讨论一些含意关纸
~的架构我们的弄巧成拙的影响力行为的理解。
Conceptualizing 弄巧成拙的影响力行为
历史的,弄巧成拙的行为那学者研究有在社会的心理学的十字路口站立
而且临床的心理学.(举例来说,Berglas&Baumeister,1993) Baumeister& Scher(1988) 提供了一
第一包罗万象的文学检讨。 他们定义了弄巧成拙的行为当做 " 任何的深思熟虑的
或有的企图行为清楚的,明确的或或许否定招致在那之上自己的或在那之上自己的
计画".(3) 他们继续安置行为 " 一定是企图的, 虽然伤害对自己的没有
必须是那想要或行动的主要目标".(3)