:, *,,,,,,,. 498.,,.,.,. * 2012 ( ) (NRF-2012S1A3A ).. :,, ,

Similar documents
지난 2009년 11월 애플의 아이폰 출시로 대중화에 접어든 국내 스마트폰의 역사는 4년 만에 ‘1인 1스마트폰 시대’를 눈앞에 두면서 모바일 최강국의 꿈을 실현해 가고 있다

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: * Strenghening the Cap

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

歯14.양돈규.hwp

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: 3 * Effects of 9th

:,,.,. 456, 253 ( 89, 164 ), 203 ( 44, 159 ). Cronbach α= ,.,,..,,,.,. :,, ( )

., (, 2000;, 1993;,,, 1994), () 65, 4 51, (,, ). 33, 4 30, 23 3 (, ) () () 25, (),,,, (,,, 2015b). 1 5,

,,,.,,,, (, 2013).,.,, (,, 2011). (, 2007;, 2008), (, 2005;,, 2007).,, (,, 2010;, 2010), (2012),,,.. (, 2011:,, 2012). (2007) 26%., (,,, 2011;, 2006;

202 김 수 현 원 영 신 있으므로, 이러한 선수들의 긍정적인 태도를 높여 구 단의 성과를 향상시킬 수 있는 조직적 차원의 연구가 요구된다 하겠다. 따라서 선수들을 대상으로 한 프로 구단의 조직성과 제고에 관한 학문적 작업은 중요한 연구과제인 것이다. 최근 조직 커뮤

상담학연구 * Shelton(1990) Eden(2001).. D 480,, 425..,... * (Corresponding Author): / / ( ) 1370 Tel: /


가족스트레스와 가정생활만족도 간의 관계에서 자아분화의 매개효과

,, (, 2010). (, 2007).,,, DMB, ,, (, 2010)., LG., (, 2010) (, ,, ) 3, 10, (, 2009).,,. (, 2010)., (, 2010). 11

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Mediating Eff

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: The Effect of Caree

교육치료연구 SNS : SNS SNS SNS SNS, SNS, SNS. SPSS MACRO SNS., SNS SNS. SNS, SNS,. SNS SNS,. (2016) (Corresponding Author) : / / 608 / Tel:

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: * A Study on the Pe


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: * The Structural Rel

<3131BAB8B0C7BBE7C8B8BFACB1B85FC3D6BCD2BFAC2E687770>

27 2, 17-31, , * ** ***,. K 1 2 2,.,,,.,.,.,,.,. :,,, : 2009/08/19 : 2009/09/09 : 2009/09/30 * 2007 ** *** ( :

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

장병고충신고저해요인에대한주관적인식유형탐색 장병고충신고저해요인에대한 주관적인식유형탐색 : 육군부사관을대상으로 김영곤 * 1) Ⅰ. 서론 Ⅱ. 장병고충처리에대한이론및제도적논의 Ⅲ. 연구설계 Ⅳ. 분석결과 Ⅴ. 결론및정책적함의 Abstract A Study on the Ty

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: A Study on the Opti


인문사회과학기술융합학회

. (2013) % % 2. 1% (,, 2014).. (,,, 2007). 41.3% (, 2013). (,,,,,, 2010)... (2010),,, 4.,.. (2012), (2010),., (,, 2009).... (, 2012).


230 한국교육학연구 제20권 제3호 I. 서 론 청소년의 언어가 거칠어지고 있다. 개ㅅㄲ, ㅆㅂ놈(년), 미친ㅆㄲ, 닥쳐, 엠창, 뒤져 등과 같은 말은 주위에서 쉽게 들을 수 있다. 말과 글이 점차 된소리나 거센소리로 바뀌고, 외 국어 남용과 사이버 문화의 익명성 등

상담학연구,, SPSS 21.0., t,.,,,..,.,.. (Corresponding Author): / / / Tel: /


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Study on Teache

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: IPA * Analysis of Perc

- * (32 ), ,,,, * 2013 ( ) (KRF-2013S1A3A ). :,, 3 53 Tel : ,

원고스타일 정의

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp DOI: The Effects of Pare

,......

#Ȳ¿ë¼®

창업 여성CEO의 특성이 경영성과에 미치는 영향 연구

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: * The Grounds and Cons

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: * Relationship among

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: 3 * The Effect of H

특수교육논총 * ,,,,..,..,, 76.7%.,,,.,,.. * 1. **

大学4年生の正社員内定要因に関する実証分析

Job Satisfaction and Service Quality between Non-regular and Regular workers in Commercial Sports Facilities: Based on Qualitative Method Bokyeon Kim

<30382E20B1C7BCF8C0E720C6EDC1FD5FC3D6C1BEBABB2E687770>

288 經, 35 卷 4 그러나 정작 CRM은 사용되는 상황이나 CRM을 보는 관점에 따라 그 의미가 분분 한 것이 실상이다. 예를 들면, 영업을 담당하는 사람들은 CRM을 하나의 영업전략으 로 정의하고 있는 반면, 캠페인 관리를 하는 사람은 CRM을 좀더 개인화되고


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: An Exploratory Stud

. 45 1,258 ( 601, 657; 1,111, 147). Cronbach α=.67.95, 95.1%, Kappa.95.,,,,,,.,...,.,,,,.,,,,,.. :,, ( )

,......

차 례... 박영목 **.,... * **.,., ,,,.,,


:,,,. (,, ), (,,,, ),,. 559 ( 205, 203, 151; 132, 427).,,,.,.,,,,.,,,,..,. :,, ( )

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: * A Analysis of


상담학연구 *,. 41 -, ,,, 82,,, Likert..96,.94,.88,.89, ,. (CCR: Conflict Over Child Rearing) (DSC: Dissatisfaction With Childre

에너지경제연구제 16 권제 1 호 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 16, Number 1, March 2017 : pp. 35~55 학술 전력시장가격에대한역사적요인분해 * 35

,126,865 43% (, 2015).,.....,..,.,,,,,, (AMA) Lazer(1963)..,. 1977, (1992)

380 Hyun Seok Choi Yunji Kwon Jeongcheol Ha 기존 선행연구에서는 이론연구 (Ki, 2010; Lee, 2012), 단순통계분석 (Lee, 2008), 회귀분석 (Kim, 2012)과 요인분석 (Chung, 2012), 경로분석 (Ku,

Kor. J. Aesthet. Cosmetol., 라이프스타일은 개인 생활에 있어 심리적 문화적 사회적 모든 측면의 생활방식과 차이 전체를 말한다. 이러한 라이프스 타일은 사람의 내재된 가치관이나 욕구, 행동 변화를 파악하여 소비행동과 심리를 추측할 수 있고, 개인의

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp DOI: (NCS) Method of Con

12주간의 복합 파워트레이닝

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp DOI: * The

Vol.259 C O N T E N T S M O N T H L Y P U B L I C F I N A N C E F O R U M

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Research Trend

에너지경제연구 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 9, Number 2, September 2010 : pp. 19~41 석유제품브랜드의자산가치측정 : 휘발유를 중심으로 19

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp DOI: NCS : G * The Analy

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

<30392EB9DAB0A1B6F72CC1A4B3B2BFEE2E687770>

상담학연구 : *.,,,,, (N=495)..,.,.. * (2013). (Corresponding Author): / / / Tel: /

<B3EDB9AEC1FD5F3235C1FD2E687770>

한국성인에서초기황반변성질환과 연관된위험요인연구

08_¹Úö¼øöKš

278 경찰학연구제 12 권제 3 호 ( 통권제 31 호 )

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Effect of Paren

정보화정책 제14권 제2호 Ⅰ. 서론 급변하는 정보기술 환경 속에서 공공기관과 기업 들은 경쟁력을 확보하기 위해 정보시스템 구축사업 을 활발히 전개하고 있다. 정보시스템 구축사업의 성 패는 기관과 기업, 나아가 고객에게 중대한 영향을 미칠 수 있으므로, 이에 대한 통제

<3133B1C732C8A328BCF6C1A4292E687770>

상담학연구 , , ,, ( ),.,., 15 19,, 30, (Corresponding Author): / Tel: /

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: A study on Characte

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: : * A Study on the

44-6대지.08김정희-5

歯1.PDF


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * Experiences of Af

118 김정민 송신철 심규철 을 미치기 때문이다(강석진 등, 2000; 심규철 등, 2001; 윤치원 등, 2005; 하태경 등, 2004; Schibeci, 1983). 모둠 내에서 구성원들이 공동으 로 추구하는 학습 목표의 달성을 위하여 각자 맡은 역할에 따라 함께

노동경제논집 38권 3호 (전체).hwp

(5차 편집).hwp

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: * Early Childhood T

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: Awareness, Supports

상담학연구 * ,. SAS,,, Sobel test., (,, ), (, ), (, ) (,, ).,,,.,.. * (Corresponding Author): / / / Tel: / j

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: - K * The Analysis

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: * Relationship Betw

레이아웃 1

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

창업 여성CEO의 특성이 경영성과에 미치는 영향 연구

Transcription:

:, *,,,,,,,. 498.,,.,.,. * 2012 ( ) (NRF-2012S1A3A2033331).. :,, 02-940-5422, tyyoo@kw.ac.kr

(Enron). 2011. (Sherron Watkins), (Oppel, 2002)., (Milliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003).,.,., (Brinsfield, 2009).,, (Van Dyne, Ang, & Botero, 2003).,., (,,, 2010; Brinsfield, 2009; Milliken & Morrison, 2003; Milliken et al., 2003; Morrison & Milliken, 2000)... (Milliken & Morrison, 2003), (Milliken et al., 2003). 2000.. 2000 (,, 2013), (Milliken & Morrison, 2003; Morrison & Milliken, 2000; Pinder & Harlos, 2001).,.

,.., (Knoll & van Dick, 2013),.,...,, (, 2010; Brinsfield, 2009; Milliken & Morrison, 2003; Milliken et al., 2003; Morrison & Milliken, 2000)..,,. Milliken (2003). Milliken (2003).,,,..,. Milliken (2003),,.,.,,,,,,.,

(Knoll & van Dick, 2013).., (social exchange theory) (organizational support theory). (social exchange theory) (equity theory)., (learned helplessness),., (context favorability),,.,,,,,,,.. (,, 2013)., (Brinsfield, 2009).,. (,, 2013).,,. Pinder Harlos(2001) (employee silence).. Brinsfield(2009),,.,

(employee silence behavior),. (perceived supervisor support) (Eisenberger, Stinglhamber, Vandenberghe, Sucharski, & Rhoades, 2002; Shanock & Eisenberger, 2006). (Hutchison, Sowa, Eisenberger, & Huntington, 1986; DeConinck & Johnson, 2009)., (Hutchison et al., 1986).,., (Settoon, Bennett, & Liden, 1996).. Bowen Blackmon(2003),. Milliken (2003)..,.,.. 1...,.,, (Van Dyne et al., 2003).

, (Brinsfield, 2009).,,.. (acquiescent silence motivation), (Knoll & van Dick, 2013; Pinder & Harlos, 2001; Van Dyne et al., 2003). (, 2013)...,, (,,,,,, 2013, pp.313-314)., (,, 2009, p.263).,.,.,. Malatesta(1995),.,..,.,.,.,

.. 2.. (defensive silence motivation) (Knoll & van Dick, 2013; Van Dyne et al., 2003). (, 2013).,.,.. Dutton, Ashford, O neill, Hayes Wierba(1997),,., (Ashford, Rothbard, Piderit, & Dutton, 1998).,..,.,. Brinsfield(2009). (Settoon et al., 1996),,. Brinsfield(2009),.,.,,.

,.. 3.. (procedural justice) (Leventhal, 1980; Thibaut & Walker, 1975)., (, 2012). (Aryee, Budhwar & Chen, 2002).,.,. (equity theory).,.,.. Pinder Harlos(2001). Tangirala Ramanujam(2008), Brinsfield(2009). Duan, Lam, Chen Zhong(2010),..,.,.,..,,,

,.. 4..,..,.,.,. Brinsfield(2009), (2013).,.,..,.,.. 5.. (opportunistic silence motivation) (Knoll & van Dick, 2013)..,.

., (Edmondson, 1996)., John(1984),,,... Aryee (2002),,,., (2004),.,.,,..,..,.

,.. 6.. 1. 700. 539, 41 498., 498 314 (63.1%), 184 (36.9%). 30 197 (39.6%), 20 106 (21.3%), 40 130 (26.1%), 50 65 (13.0%). 328 (65.9%), 54 (10.8%), 82 (16.5%), 34 (6.8%). 131 (26.3%), 126 (25.3%), 85 (17.1%), / 81 (16.3%), / 48 (9.6%), 27 (5.4%). 178 (35.7%), 154 (30.9%),, 88 (17.7%), 62 (12.4%), 16 (3.2%). 1 ~36 3, 10 1 ( 8 10 ). (2013). 8,.,.. Likert 5, 8 (Cronbach s ).94., Knoll van Dick(2013) Brinsfield(2009)., 3.60 65.72%.

., Knoll van Dick(2013) 3 Brinsfield(2009) 2. 5,.,.. Likert 5, 5 (Cronbach s ).90., Knoll van Dick(2013) 3 Brinsfield (2009) 3. 6,.,.. Likert 5, 6 (Cronbach s ).93., Knoll van Dick(2013) 3 Brinsfield(2009) 2. 5,.,.. Likert 5, 5 (Cronbach s ).88., Hutchison (1986) Survey of Perceived Organization Support(SPOS) Eisenberger, Cummings, Armeli Lynch(1997).,. (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). 8,.,,.. Likert 5, 8 (Cronbach s ).92. Colquitt (2001). 7,.,.. Likert 5, 7

(Cronbach s ).93.., (Cronbach`s ), SPSS 18.0., AMOS 18.0, (item-parceling).,..,, RMSEA, GFI NFI, CFI, TLI. p.05,. RMSEA.05,.08,.10,. GFI NFI, CFI, TLI.90 (, 2010;, 2013;,, 2011)., Bias-corrected bootstrap.,,, 1., (r=-.52, p<.01), (r=-.54, p<.01). (r=.65, p<.01), (r=.62, p<.01), (r=.44, p<.01). (r=-.56, p<.01), (r=-.43, p<.01), (r=-.68, p<.01), (r=-.23, p<.01). AMOS 18.0.,

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1-2 -.18** - 3 -.10* -.28** - 4 -.28**.51**.17** - 5 -.17**.85** -.25**.56** - 6 -.09*.07.05.06.11* (.92) 7 -.13**.05.07.02.10*.61** (.93) 8.15** -.04 -.04 -.00 -.08 -.56** -.68** (.90) 9.07 -.03 -.01 -.04 -.10* -.43** -.39**.57** (.93) 10.07 -.06.06 -.08 -.11* -.32** -.23**.39**.51** (.88) 11.18** -.08 -.04 -.10* -.11* -.52** -.54**.65**.62**.44** (.94) (M) - 37.31 2.69 2.16 120.84 3.30 2.97 3.02 2.78 2.36 3.12 (SD) - 9.05.76 1.14 106.77.80.86.88.77.81 1. ( ). 2. =1, =2; =1, =2, 4 =3, =4, =5; =1, =2, =3, =4, =5 ;. N=498, *p<.05, **p<.01. ( =-.332, p<.001), ( =-.349, p<.001). =128.40(df=51, p<.001), RMSEA =.06, GFI=.96, NFI=.98, CFI=.99, TLI=.98, RMSEA.06.90., 1 4.. 1 2, 2-(a), 2-(b), 2-(c) 2, 3. 1 2-(a).,. 2, =1256.01(df=340, p<.001), RMSEA=.07, GFI=.84, NFI=.90, CFI=.92, TLI

=.91, RMSEA.07.90. 2 1. 2-(b) 2,. 2, =1258.39(df=341, p<.001), RMSEA=.07, GFI=.84, NFI=.90, CFI =.92, TLI=.91, RMSEA.07.90.,. 2-(c),

df RMSEA GFI NFI CFI TLI ECVI 1 1256.01*** 340.07.84.90.92.91 2.793 2 1258.39*** 341.07.84.90.92.91 2.794 1267.17*** 342.07.84.89.92.91 2.807 N=498, ***p<.001. 2, =1267.17(df=342, p<.001), RMSEA=.07, GFI =.84, NFI=.89, CFI=.92, TLI=.91, RMSEA.07.90. 2, 3. (nested model),. (ECVI; expected cross-validation index), 1, 2., 3., 1., =11.16( df=2, p<.01). 1., 1

df 1-11.16 2 1 1-2 2.38 1 2 N=498 2., =2.38( df=1, p>.05). 1 2. 2,. 2-(b),. Bias-corrected bootstrap, 4. Sobel, (Cheung & Lau, 2008)., (, 2010)., ( =-.264, p<.001). ( =-.274, p<.001)., Bootstrap, 2, 3, Estimate SE 95% > -.264***.04 [-.348, -.194] > -.274***.05 [-.374, -.186] N=498, ***p<.001

5, 6., ( =-.257, p<.001) ( =-.469, p<.001). ( =-.274, p<.001) ( =-.573, p<.001).., 5. 1. 2., ( =-.244, p<.001) ( =-.417, p<.001).,. ( =-.222, p<.001) ( =-.519, p<.001).,..163***.065.054 1.109*.034**.045.014 -.012.015 -.116* -.110* -.091 2 -.244*** -.417***.469***.171*** -.519*** -.222***.048*** N=498, *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

.,,.,,.,..,. (Hutchison et al., 1986; DeConinck & Johnson, 2009).,,.,.,.,,,.,.,.,,., ( =-.257, p<.001) ( =-.469, p<.001)..,. (Brinsfield, 2009; Duan et al., 2010; Tangirala & Ramanujam, 2008),

.,.,.,.,,.,.,.,,., ( =-.274, p<.001) ( =-.573, p<.001)...,,.,.,.,.,,.

, Knoll Van Dick(2013).,..,.,.,,,....,...,.., (common method bias).. (Brinsfield, 2009),..,..

.,.,..,,, (,, 2009).,,..,,.,,,.,,,,, (2013). (10 ). :. (2010). AMOS 18.0. :., (2009).,,. (3), 345-371., (2009).. :. (2013)... (2013). :. (2012). (10 ). :., (2004).,,. (1), 93-132., (2011). 18.0/19.0. :. (2013). :. (1), 1-17., (2013). :. (1), 73-101.,, (2010). :

. (1), 89-104. Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the relationship between organizational justice and work outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(3), 267-285. Ashford, S. J., Rothbard, N. P., Piderit, S. K., & Dutton, J. E. (1998). Out on a limb: The role of context and impression management in selling gender-equity issues. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 23-57. Bowen, F., & Blackmon, K. (2003). Spirals of silence: The dynamic effects of diversity on organizational voice. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1393-1417. Brinsfield, C. (2009). Employee silence: Investigation of dimensionality, development of measure, and examination of related factors. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2008). Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables bootstrapping with structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2), 296-325. Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386. DeConinck, J. B., & Johnson, J. T. (2009). The effects of perceived supervisor support, perceived organizational support, and organizational justice on turnover among salespeople. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 29(4), 333-351. Duan, J., Lam, W., Chen, Z., & Zhong, J. A. (2010). Leadership justice, negative organizational behaviors, and the mediating effect of affective commitment. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 38(9), 1287-1296. Dutton, J. E., Ashford, S. J., O'neill, R. M., Hayes, E., & Wierba, E. E. (1997). Reading the wind: How middle managers assess the context for selling issues to top managers. Strategic Management Journal, 18(5), 407-425. Edmondson, A. C. (1996). Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: Group and organizational influences on the detection and correction of human error. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(1), 5-28. Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived organizational support, discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(5), 812. Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I. L., & Rhoades, L. (2002). Perceived supervisor support: Contributions to perceived organizational support and employee retention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 565-573. Hutchison, S., Sowa, D., Eisenberger, R., & Huntington, R. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500-507. John, G. (1984). An empirical investigation of

some antecedents of opportunism in a marketing channel. Journal of Marketing Research, 278-289. Knoll, M., & van Dick, R. (2013). Do I hear the whistle? A first attempt to measure four forms of employee silence and their correlates. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(2), 349-362. Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In K. Gergen, M., M. Greenberg, & R. Wills(Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research(pp.27-55). New York: Plenum. Malatesta, R. M. (1995). Understanding the dynamics of organizational and supervisory commitment using a social exchange framework. UMI Dissertation Services. Milliken, F. J., & Morrison, E. W. (2003). Shades of silence: Emerging themes and future directions for research on silence in organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1563-1568. Milliken, F. J., Morrison, E. W., & Hewlin, P. F. (2003). An exploratory study of employee silence: Issues that employees don t communicate upward and why. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1453-1476. Morrison, E. W., & Milliken, F. J. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 706-725. Oppel Jr, R. A. (2002). Enron official says many knew about shaky company finances. New York Times. 2 15. http://www. nytimes.com. Pinder, C. C., & Harlos, K. P. (2001). Employee silence: Quiescence and acquiescence as responses to perceived injustice. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 20, 331-369. Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698-714. Settoon, R. P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: Perceived organizational support, leader- member exchange, and employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(3), 219-227. Shanock, L. R., & Eisenberger, R. (2006). When supervisors feel supported: Relationships with subordinates' perceived supervisor support, perceived organizational support, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 689-695. Tangirala, S., & Ramanujam, R. (2008). Employee silence on critical work issues: The cross level effects of procedural justice climate. Personnel Psychology, 61(1), 37-68. Thibaut, J. W., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates. Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1359-1392. 1 : 2014. 01. 10 2 : 2014. 04. 08 : 2014. 05. 20

: The Mediating Effect of Silence Motivation on the Relationships among Employee Silence Behavior, Perceived Supervisor Support, and Perceived Procedural Justice A-Reum Jo Tae-Yong Yoo Kwangwoon University The purposes of this study were to investigate the relationship between perceived supervisor support and employee silence behavior, the mediating roles of acquiescent silence motivation and defensive silence motivation in the relationship between perceived supervisor support and employee silence behavior, the relationship between perceived procedural justice and employee silence behavior, and the mediating roles of acquiescent silence motivation and opportunistic silence motivation in the relationship between perceived procedural justice and employee silence behavior. Using the survey research method, data were collected from 498 employees who were working in a variety of organizations in Korea. The results of this study showed that perceived supervisor support is negatively related with employee silence behavior. And the relationship between perceived supervisor support and employee silence behavior is partially mediated by acquiescent silence motivation and defensive silence motivation. Also, perceived procedural justice is negatively related with employee silence behavior. The relationship between perceived procedural justice and employee silence behavior is fully mediated by acquiescent silence motivation and opportunistic silence motivation. Based on these results, we discussed the implications of study, limitations, and the suggestions for future research. Key words : employee silence behavior, silence motivation, perceived supervisor support, erceived procedural justice