Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Vol. 77, No. 1, January, pp. 321, 1999

Article ID obhd.1998.2812, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on

A Structural Equation Model of the Effects of

Negative Affectivity, LeaderMember
Exchange, and Perceived Job Mobility on In-role
and Extra-role Performance: A Chinese Case
Chun Hui and Kenneth S. Law
Department of Management of Organizations, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology,
Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong

and

Zhen Xiong Chen

School of Business, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong

In this paper, we contrast the effects of leadermember

exchange (LMX) with the effects of perceived job mobility on in-
role performance and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB).
We further model negative affectivity as the antecedent of both
LMX and perceived job mobility and suggest that LMX and per-
ceived job mobility mediated the relationship between negative
affectivity and performance. We obtained matching data from
supervisor and subordinates in a major battery manufacturing
company in southern China. Subordinates provided the negative
affectivity, perceived job mobility, and LMX assessment, and their
immediate supervisors provided the in-role performance and
OCB assessment. Results from a structural equation analysis
show that both LMX and perceived job mobility predicted OCB.
Instead of being a direct antecedent of OCB, the relationship
between negative affectivity and OCB is found to be mediated by
LMX and perceived job mobility. Theoretical implications of the
results are discussed. 1999 Academic Press

The work described in this paper was fully supported by a grant from the Research Grants
Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project HKUST534/95H),
awarded to Chun Hui and Kenneth Law.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Chun Hui, Department of Management of
Organizations, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong
Kong. E-mail: [email protected].
3
0749-5978/99 $30.00
Copyright 1999 by Academic Press
All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
4 HUI, LAW, AND CHEN

Member behaviors that can contribute to the effective functioning of an

organization have long been of interest to researchers and practitioners. Re-
searchers have distinguished between in-role performance and extra-role per-
formance, where in-role performance refers to work behaviors that are pre-
scribed by formal job roles and extra-role performance refers to work behaviors
that are beyond formal job roles. Researchers have noted the importance of
extra-role performance to the overall functioning of an organization (e.g., Bar-
nard, 1938; Katz & Kahn, 1966; Organ, 1988). A popular operationalization of
extra-role performance is organizational citizenship behavior (OCB; Bate-
man & Organ, 1983; Organ, 1988; Smith, Organ, & Near, 1983). Organ (1988,
p. 4) defined OCB as . . . individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly
or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate
promotes the effective functioning of the organization. Discretionary means
that OCB is neither explicitly enforced nor required by the formal job contract.
Since OCB is discretionary and yet related to the effective functioning of the
organization, an important issue that follows is identifying the motivational
bases of OCB. In other words, what are some of the situations in which employ-
ees would be motivated to perform or be inhibited from performing OCB? Do
these motivators or inhibitors affect in-role performance and OCB differen-
tially? These are the research questions that have motivated the present study.
Previous research has identified various motivational bases of OCB, includ-
ing dispositional and cognitive antecedents (cf. Organ, 1988). Personal disposi-
tions are the individual characteristics that affect OCB, but are independent
of organizational contexts. Affectivity has been identified as an important
dispositional antecedent of OCB (e.g., George & Brief, 1992; Organ, 1990). The
cognitive antecedent that has attracted arguably the most attention is fairness
perception (e.g., Moorman, 1991; Organ, 1988, 1990). Relatively recently, re-
search has also examined the relational basis of OCB, that is, the impact of
effective work relationships on OCB (e.g., Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1993; Set-
toon, Bennett, & Liden, 1996; Tansky, 1993; Tierney & Bauer, 1996; Wayne,
Shore, & Liden, 1997).
The present study is a follow-up to the research on the antecedents of OCB
and makes several contributions to this literature. First, in this study, we
identify a new cognitive antecedent of OCBperceived job mobilityborrowed
from the turnover literature. This antecedent represents an assessment by the
employee about the favorability of the external job environment. Second, we
follow up on the research on the relational basis of OCB by examining the
mediating effects of work relationships on the relationship between OCB and
a dispositional antecedentnegative affectivity. Third, we contrast the effects
of perceived job mobility and effective work relationships on OCB. In organiza-
tional contexts, there may be simultaneous factors that promote and inhibit
OCB. Perceived job mobility is expected to be negatively related to OCB,
whereas effective work relationships are expected to be positively related to
OCB. The present study contrasts the effects of these two counteracting factors
on OCB. Fourth, we examine the proposition that the effects of dispositional
 ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR 5

antecedents on OCB may be mediated by both cognitive and relational vari-

ables. Instead of being a direct antecedent of OCB, personal dispositions such
as negative affectivity may affect employees cognitive assessments of their job
situations (i.e., perceived job mobility) and the kind of relationships they have
with key organizational members (i.e., effective work relationships). Cognitive
assessment and relationships, in turn, affect OCB. Structural equation model-
ing is used to test the sequential order of the different groups of antecedents
of OCB. Fifth, most of the studies on OCB and its antecedents have been
conducted in the United States. This study adds to the literature by employing
an indigenous OCB scale developed for Chinese organizations as well as testing
the antecedents of OCB in the Chinese context.
In the following sections, we first discuss the relationship between effective
work relationships, perceived job mobility, and OCB. This is then followed by
discussions of the effects of disposition in terms of negative affectivity on an
employees cognitive judgments of reality. Four hypotheses are developed and
tested with 392 supervisorsubordinate pairs from a battery manufacturing
factory in the Peoples Republic of China (PRC). This paper concludes with
discussions on the implications of the results on future research about the
antecedents of OCB.

LeaderMember Exchange As an Antecedent of OCB

Researchers have operationalized the relational basis of OCB mainly in terms

of the leadermember exchange (LMX) theory developed by Graen and his
colleagues (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975; Graen & Cashman, 1975;
Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). LMX denotes the quality of the relationship between
an employee and the employees immediate supervisor. A quality relationship
is characterized by mutual trust, respect, and obligation, and this relationship
has been found to motivate in-role performance (Graen & Cashman, 1975;
Graen, Novak, & Sommerkemp, 1982) as well as extra-role performance (Podsa-
koff & MacKenzie, 1993; Settoon et al., 1996; Tansky, 1993; Tierney & Bauer,
1996; Wayne et al., 1997).
Research has shown that LMX is related to OCB (e.g., Settoon et al., 1996;
Wayne et al., 1997). However, examination of this relationship has not yet been
conducted outside the North American context. Examining this relationship
in cultural contexts other than that of North America may broaden our under-
standing of how these constructs operate across cultural boundaries. Of particu-
lar interest is that LMX should have an impact on OCB in the Chinese context.
Chinese people have a strong personal orientation in their daily interactions.
Interpersonal relationships, or guanxi, are extremely important determinants
of interpersonal interactions in China (Hwang, 1987; Jacobs, 1980). Wall (1990)
concluded that a good job, entry to a volley ball game, swimming, an additional
shower coupon, a plane ticket, a Sony TV, admission to a good university,
permission to have a second child, all require guanxi (p.23). With such a strong
interpersonal orientation, it is reasonable to hypothesize that interpersonal
variables such as LMX would have a strong effect on the incumbents chances
6 HUI, LAW, AND CHEN

of participating in extra-role behaviors in China. Note, however, that we are

not advocating that LMX would have a different impact on OCB in China than
in the United States. The contribution of using the Chinese sample in this case
is that this study represents an attempt to test the generality of this relation-
ship and to stimulate researchers to begin to think about how antecedents may
relate to OCB across national boundaries.
Based on the previous research on the relationship between LMX and in-
role performance and OCB and on the strong social orientation of the Chinese,
we hypothesize that in China, LMX predicts both in-role performance and OCB:
H1a: Leadermember exchange has a significant positive relationship with OCB in China.
H1b: Leadermember exchange has a significant positive relationship with in-role perfor-
mance in China.

Perceived Job Mobility As an Antecedent of OCB

Perceived job mobility represents an employees assessment of the favorabil-
ity of the external job environment. It refers to an individuals perceived ease
of movement between organizations: the more perceived job alternatives and
better market opportunities, the higher the perceived job mobility. Even though
the effects of perceived job mobility on OCB have not been examined directly
in the literature, Organ and Konovskys (1989) notion of cognitive appraisal
may have implied that it can affect OCB. Organ and Konovsky (1989) identified
cognitive appraisal as the appraisal of jobs by individuals who compare job
features to some standard or criteria. Whether alternative jobs are perceived
to be available when an employee appraises his/her job may represent an
important component of this appraisal. Organ and Konovsky (1989) found
cognitive appraisal in terms of the comparison of a job to some criteria to be
predictive of OCB.
Perceived mobility is important for two reasons. First, it is common for
employees to examine if they have mobility. Whether this perception affects
employees organizational experience and their contribution to an organization
is an interesting question. Second, most previous research on the antecedents
of OCB identifies what may promote OCB, for example, job satisfaction, organi-
zational commitment, fairness perception, and LMX (see Organ & Ryan, 1995,
for a meta-analysis of these antecedents). It is interesting to consider if there
are common experiences on the part of employees that may lower the likelihood
of performing OCB. Perceived job mobility, as discussed below, has a negative
impact on OCB.
The negative relationship between perceived job mobility and OCB may be
explained by the side-bet theory of organizational commitment (Becker, 1960).
Side-bets refer to anything of importance that an employee has invested,
such as time, money, effort, or other contributions, in the organization. These
side-bets would be lost or devalued at some cost to the employee, if he/she left
the organization (Becker, 1960; Meyer & Allen, 1984). Becker (1960) originally
proposed the notion of side-bet investments as a social mechanism. Under this
mechanism, individuals would be compelled to commit to a certain line of
 ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR 7

activities or behavior because discontinuing the activity (e.g., quitting ones job)
would create penalties such as loss of valued investments (Cohen & Lowenberg,
1990; Wallance, 1997). In the context of the relationship between perceived job
mobility and OCB, if there is no perceived alternative, individuals would be
compelled to continue their investment in their current organization so as to
avoid losing all their investments. OCB may represent one form of employee
investment. Note that OCB is defined as discretionary in nature by Organ
(1988). Thus, OCB may represent ones incremental contribution to an organi-
zation or ones investment in an organization. Therefore, when employees per-
ceive little job mobility, they are more likely to perform OCB. Conversely, when
employees perceive more job mobility, they are less likely to perform OCB.
Perceived high mobility may not result in low in-role performance for at
least two reasons, however. First, perceived mobility does not necessarily mean
that an employee is going to withdraw from the job. For example, an employee
may perceive high levels of mobility but may enjoy his/her job so much that
he/she is willing to make a wholesome contribution. Second, by definition, there
are more organizational constraints on performing and maintaining in-role
performance than on extra-role performance. Thus, even when one perceives
oneself as having job mobility, one may reduce extra-role but not in-role
performance.
We conducted the present study using a Chinese sample. Perceived mobility
will have influence on an employees OCB in Chinese organizations, similar
to that in Western organizations. Interpersonal harmony and altruism toward
colleagues (both are key dimensions of OCB) have been emphasized and consid-
ered as virtues (cf. Yang & Cheng, 1987) in the collective Chinese society. When
employees in Chinese organizations perceive fewer alternative job opportuni-
ties, they will be more willing to continue their investment in the organization
by performing OCB, such as establishing harmonious interpersonal relation-
ship with peers and helping colleagues to solve work-related problems.
Based on the above discussions, we have developed a second set of hypotheses
for this study:

H2a: Perceived job mobility has a significant negative relationship with OCB. The more
mobility the employee perceives, the less OCB the employee performs.
H2b: Perceived mobility has a minimal effect on in-role performance.

Negative Affectivity and OCB

In a discussion of the motivational basis of OCB, Organ (1990) suggested

that disposition and OCB may be related. Indeed, disposition as an antecedent
of OCB has received substantial attention from researchers. But disposition
has not been found to explain a significant portion of variance in work-related
behavior in general (Dunn, Mount, Barrick, & Ones, 1995; Tett, Jackson, &
Rothstein, 1991) or in OCB in particular (Organ & Ryan, 1995). This raises
the issue of how disposition affects OCB. We suggest that disposition may not
8 HUI, LAW, AND CHEN

affect OCB directly. Research in social psychology has shown that individual
differences variables such as job attitudes do not predict specific behaviors
well (e.g., Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). Similar to job attitudes, dispositions may
not predict specific behaviors such as OCB well. More importantly, researchers
have recognized the impact of situational constraints on the effects of job
attitudes on actual behavior (Herman, 1973). This suggests that the impact of
individual differences such as job attitudes and disposition on job behaviors
may be mediated by situational constraints. Conceptually, disposition may be
dominant in determining OCB until there are situational factors that constrain
the behaviors of the individual, or when an individuals organizational experi-
ence defines ones relationship with the organization.
Negative affectivity is a common dispositional variable in OCB research
(Organ & Ryan, 1995). According to Watson, Clark, and Tellegan (1988), nega-
tive affectivity reflects an individuals disposition to respond negatively regard-
less of the situation. As a disposition, the effects of negative affectivity on OCB
may be constrained by situational factors. One kind of situational factor that
may constrain the employees behavior is the employees organizational experi-
ence. Instead of arguing that a person who always responds negatively to
external stimuli would have a lower chance of performing OCB, it may be
appropriate to argue that affectivity should be the antecedent to employees
perceptions of reality or to ones organizational experience. The organizational
experiences in the present study are the relationship with ones supervisor
(i.e., LMX) and ones perception of the availability of jobs (i.e., perceived job
mobility). In other words, if a person tends to view life negatively, this person
may be less likely to build effective work relationships with others and to
perceive many job alternatives. These perceptions may then in turn affect OCB.
While research has shown that LMX mediates the effects of a number of other
antecedents of OCB, studies on OCB have not examined whether LMX mediates
the effects between dispositional antecedents and OCB. For example, Settoon
et al. (1996) showed that LMX was related to OCB, but they did not examine the
mediating effects of LMX on OCB. Wayne et al. (1997) examined the mediating
effects of LMX on the relationship between a number of antecedents and OCB,
including development experiences, promotions, organizational tenure, liking,
expectations, and dyad tenure. Wayne et al. did not, however, examine the
mediating effects of LMX on dispositional antecedents and OCB. There has
been no research on the mediating effects of perceived job mobility on OCB.
Based on the above discussion, we propose that predisposition such as negative
affectivity would affect both LMX and perceived job mobility, which in turn
would affect in-role performance and OCB (Fig. 1), as stated in the following
hypotheses.

H3a: Negative affectivity inversely relates to employees LMX with their supervisors.
H3b: Negative affectivity inversely relates to employees perceptions of mobility.
H4: Negative affectivity does not have significant effects on OCB after controlling for the
effects of employees perceptions of mobility and LMX.
 ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR 9

FIG. 1. The proposed structural relationship between negative affectivity, LMX, perceived
mobility, and in-role/extra-role behaviors.

METHOD

Sample
Participants in this study are employees in a SinoHong Kong joint venture.
The company, located in Shenzhen, is one of the largest battery manufacturers
in Asia and has about 2000 employees. Most of these employees work on
the production floor. Separate questionnaires for supervisors and subordinate
workers were created. The supervisor questionnaires were distributed to 140
supervisors; the subordinate questionnaires were distributed to 420 immediate
subordinates of these supervisors. In other words, three immediate subordi-
nates of each supervisor received the subordinate questionnaires. To protect
the confidentiality of responses from all respondents, respondents were asked
on the instruction sheet to seal the completed questionnaires into provided
envelopes and return the sealed envelopes to the person who distributed the
questionnaires. In no case was the seal broken, nor did any seal show signs of
being broken or resealed. Respondents who completed the supervisory question-
naire were asked not to fill in the subordinate questionnaire as well. The
number of questionnaires returned was 126 supervisory questionnaires and
392 subordinate questionnaires, representing a response rate of 90 and 93%,
respectively. After deleting records with unmatched supervisorsubordinate
pairs, a total of 386 supervisorsubordinate dyads remained and constituted
the sample for this study. Two hundred respondents (48%) were male and
only 42 respondents (15%) were university graduates. The average age of the
respondents was 24, and 290 (75%) of them were unmarried. One hundred
sixteen (30%) of the respondents were first-line supervisors and 16 respondents
(4%) were middle managers. The average job tenure was 2 years and average
organizational tenure was 2.75 years.
10 HUI, LAW, AND CHEN

Measures

The two questionnaires contained the various measures used in the present
study. First, the supervisory questionnaire contained the OCB and in-role
performance measure, in which supervisors were asked to evaluate the OCB
of their immediate subordinates. Second, the subordinate questionnaire con-
tained measures of negative affectivity, perceived job mobility, LMX (i.e., rela-
tionship with immediate supervisor), and demographic variables. All items
used in the present study were in Chinese. To assure equivalence of the mea-
sures in the Chinese and the English versions, back-translation from the Chi-
nese into the English version was first performed (Brislin, 1980). The two
translations revealed no substantive differences in meanings of the items.
Three Chinese judges then personally went through all items to assure that
they would be meaningful to Chinese subjects. Finally, a version of the question-
naire was sent to a representative of the company where data were collected
for final approval. Thus, the translation used in the present study should be
acceptable to Chinese subjects. All items were modified to fit into the seven-
point Likert-scale format (1, strongly disagree; 7, strongly agree).

LMX. To measure LMX, we used the seven-item LMX scale (Scandura &
Graen, 1984). This short form of the LMX scale has been widely adopted in
LMX research (cf. Schriesheim & Gardiner, 1992). The coefficient alpha of this
scale in the present study was .73.

Negative affectivity. We used the 10-item Negative Affectivity scale devel-

oped by Watson et al. (1988) to measure negative affectivity. This scale measures
an individuals disposition to respond negatively regardless of the situation.
The coefficient alpha of the 10 negative affectivity items in the present study
was .72.

Perceived job mobility. We adopted a four-item measure of perceived job

mobility from the turnover literature (Rusbalt & Farell, 1983). Perceived mobil-
ity or perceived job alternatives have been important constructs in studying
turnover (e.g., Hulin, Roznoswski, & Hachiya, 1985; Mobley, Griffeth, Hand, &
Meglino, 1979). The four items used to measure perceived mobility are the
following: (1) I have many jobs to choose from besides this job. (2) The jobs I
can find are much better than this job. (3) The way of occupying my time would
be more ideal if I worked elsewhere. (4) It is easy for me to find a suitable job
elsewhere. The coefficient alpha for perceived mobility in the present study
was .66.

In-role performance. The in-role performance scale was adopted from Wil-
liams (1988). This five-item scale focuses on performance in the areas that
are part of the requirements as specified in job descriptions. For example,
supervisors were asked to evaluate if their subordinates complete the duties
specified in their job descriptions and if their subordinates meet formal job
requirements. The coefficient alpha for this scale in the present study was .75.
 ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR 11

OCB. OCB was measured by the indigenous Chinese measure developed

by Farh, Earley, and Lin (1997). This measure of OCB was developed and
validated in Taiwan. We expected employees in Mainland China to be more
similar to those in Taiwan than to those in the United States. To capitalize on
the cultural variance of measuring OCB, we used the Farh et al. scale instead
of the OCB scale used in American samples. To enhance the face validity of
the Farh et al. scale further, we simplified the scale by first retaining the five
dimensions of OCB identified by Farh et al. and then deleting those items that
were deemed inappropriate for employees in a factory setting. A total of 15
items were used to represent five dimensions of OCB in this company: altruism,
conscientiousness, identification with the company, interpersonal harmony,
and protecting company resources. Altruism refers to employee behaviors that
deal with helping a fellow colleague in an organizationally relevant task. The
Cronbachs alpha of this scale in the present study was .79. Conscientiousness
refers to employee behaviors that go well beyond the minimum role require-
ments of the organization. The coefficient alpha of this scale in the present
study was .72. Identification with the company refers to employee behaviors
that indicate involvement in or concern with the overall well-being of the
organization. The coefficient alpha of this scale in the present study was .74.
Interpersonal harmony refers to negative employee behaviors that aim at per-
sonal power and that have a detrimental effect on others. The coefficient alpha
of this scale in the present study was .83. Protecting company resources refers
to negative employee behaviors that involve the abuse of company resources
and policies to satisfy personal means. The coefficient alpha of this scale in
the present study was .69. Two of the OCB dimensions, interpersonal harmony
and protecting company resources, were reverse scaled. These 15 items are
listed in the Appendix.
Three of the OCB dimensions identified by Farh et al. (1997) are dimensions
identical to those identified in the United States: altruism, conscientiousness,
and identification with company (referred to as civic virtue in the literature)
(cf. Organ, 1988; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, & Fetter, 1990). The OCB
scale developed by Podsakoff et al. that was based on Organs (1988) conceptual-
ization of the dimensionality of the OCB construct yielded good psychometric
properties. This scale included altruism, conscientiousness, and civic virtue.
The other two dimensions, interpersonal harmony and protecting company
resources, were argued by Farh et al. to be specific to their Chinese sample.
Thus, using this scale should capture more variance in OCB that is unique to
the Chinese samples. Even so, there are certainly commonalities between the
dimensions of OCB across the American and the Chinese scales.

Analysis

Although the psychometric properties of the Chinese OCB scale had been
tested in the Farh et al. (1997) study, we conducted a confirmatory factor
analysis to examine the scale for two reasons. First, the scale was developed
in Taiwan, where organizational forms and work values might not be exactly
12 HUI, LAW, AND CHEN

the same as those in China. Second, we adopted the Farh et al. scale by reducing
the items. It was therefore necessary to examine if this adopted version had
good psychometric properties. The factorial structure of the 15 OCB items
was subject to confirmatory factory analysis using the LISREL 8.12a program
(Joreskog & Sorbom, 1993). In addition to studying the hypothesized five-factor
structure over the null model of no relationship among the items, we also tested
an alternative one-factor model. In this model, all 15 items were loaded onto
the same single factor. In other words, we were testing if the supervisors were
able to distinguish the five OCB dimensions from one another.
To test the hypotheses advanced in the present
study,we used the maximum
likelihood procedure in LISREL 8.12a (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1993). Because
there are computational limitations for LISREL models involving too many
indicators (Bentler & Chou, 1987), we simplified the structural model in the
present study by reducing the number of indicators for some of the constructs.
Specifically, for LMX and negative affectivity, we combined the items with the
highest and the lowest loading by averaging until we yielded three or four
aggregated items. For example, the items with highest and the lowest loadings
were averaged to form a first new indicator, and the items with the next highest
and the next lowest loadings were averaged to form the second new indicator,
etc. This is a common approach in the literature of structural equation analysis
and was used in Mathieu and Farr (1991) and Mathieu, Hofmann, and Farr
(1993).
OCB was treated as the latent factor indexed by the five categories of extra-
role behaviors. Items on each of the five indigenous OCB dimensions were
averaged. The resulting five averaged OCB dimensions were used as five differ-
ent indicators of the latent OCB construct. This treatment allowed us to treat
OCB as an integral construct with five different indicators. This is deemed
appropriate because, consistent with previous OCB research, the hypotheses
regarding OCB were at the construct level; that is, we did not hypothesize
differential effects of the OCB dimensions. Hypotheses at the construct level
should be tested at the construct level (Law, Wong, & Mobley, 1998).
There were also theoretical and empirical justifications for defining OCB as
the common factor underlying its dimensions. Studies on OCB have typically
found moderate to strong correlation among the OCB dimensions (see, e.g.,
Bateman & Organ, 1983; Organ, 1990; MacKenzie, Podsakoff & Fetter, 1991),
indicating that there may be a common factor underlying various OCB dimen-
sions. According to some early management researchers (see, e.g., Barnard,
1938; Katz & Kahn, 1966; Roethlisberger & Dickson, 1939), it is meaningful to
conceptualize a psychological construct that represents the employees overall
willingness to cooperate and to exert extra effort for the organization. Organ
(1988, 1990) related this construct of willingness to cooperate to the OCB
construct. Under this conceptualization, various types of citizenship behaviors
are simply the manifestations of an employees willingness to exert extra effort
for the organization. The common factor underlying these dimensions would,
therefore, be a good way to represent this psychological state of the employees.
To test the hypothesis that perceived job mobility would have minimal effects
 ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR 13

on in-role performance (Hypothesis 2b) and negative affectivity would have

insignificant effects on OCB after controlling for LMX and perceived mobility
(Hypotheses 4), we used nested model testing in structural equation analysis.
A full model where both these two paths in the structural model were included
was tested against a nested model with both paths deleted. An insignificant
change in the models chi-square between these two nested models meant that
both paths were insignificant.
To assess if the observed covariance matrix fitted our hypothesized model,
2
we used the overall model chi-square measure ( ), the goodness-of-fit index
(GFI, Joreskog & Sorbom, 1993), the comparative fit index (CFI,
Bentler,1990),
and the standardized root-mean-square residual (RMR, Joreskog & Sorbom,
1986) as indicators of overall model fit. The RMR is a measure of the average
discrepancy between the fitted and observed covariance matrices. An RMR of
less than .05 means good model fit. The CFI compares the relative improvement
in fit for a proposed model over a strict null model of complete independence
between the various items. Values above .90 for CFI suggest acceptable fit
(Bentler & Bonnett, 1980). The CFI is recommended as the best approximation
of the population value (Gerbing & Anderson, 1988).

RESULTS

Results of the confirmatory factor analysis of the OCB dimensions confirmed

a five-factor structure of the 15 items. The chi-square statistics for this five-
factor model (2 256.65; df 80) were significantly lower than those for both
the null model (2 1801.40; df 105) and the one-factor model (2 632.60;
df 90). In addition, both the standardized RMR of .066 and the CFI of
.90 showed that the five-factor model fitted better than the one-factor model
(RMR .10; CFI .68). We concluded that supervisors were able to distinguish
the five OCB dimensions of altruism, conscientiousness, identification with
company, interpersonal harmony, and protecting company resources, and that
this is a reasonable scale to measure OCB in the present sample.
Intercorrelations and reliabilities of the exogenous and endogenous variables
in the structural equation model are shown in Table 1. Table 1 shows that
reliabilities of all the variables are quite acceptable for research purposes and

TABLE 1
Intercorrelations among the Measured Variables

1 2 3 4 5

(1) In-role performance: (.75)a

(2) OCB: .65**
(3) LMX: .11* .21** (.73)
(4) Perceived mobility (MOB): .03 .11* .13* (.66)
(5) Negative affectivity (NA): .07 .13* .19** .21** (.72)

Note. N 347; * p .05; ** p .01.

a
Numbers in parentheses are the coefficient alphas.
14 HUI, LAW, AND CHEN

ranged from .66 to .75. The zero-order correlations were all in the expected
directions and worked as preliminary confirmation of the prescribed hypothe-
ses, except for the positive correlation between negative affectivity and per-
ceived job mobility. Leadermember exchange was correlated with in-role per-
formance and OCB (r .11, p .05 and r .21, p .01, respectively). In
contrast, perceived mobility only correlated with OCB (r .11, p .05) but
not with in-role performance. Negative affectivity was found to be significantly
correlated with LMX (r .19, p .01). Contrary to our hypothesis (H3b),
negative affectivity correlated positively with perceived job mobility (r .21,
p .01).
In order to test the hypotheses formally, we conducted a structural equation
analysis of the relationships among negative affectivity, LMX, perceived job
mobility, OCB, and in-role performance. We first examined hypotheses H1 to
H3b by testing the model in Fig. 1. The structural equation model had a model
chi-square of 357.07 with 145 degrees of freedom. All the model fit indices
(RMR .056, GFI .90, CFI .90) showed that the observed covariance matrix
fitted reasonably into the hypothesized model. The resulting path estimates are
shown in Fig. 2.
Hypothesis 1a and 1b state that LMX has positive effects on OCB and in-
role performance, respectively. Figure 2 shows that LMX has significant effects
on OCB ( .25, p .01). In agreement with findings in the literature, LMX
also has significant effects on in-role performance ( .16, p .05). Hypothesis
1 is supported. Our second hypothesis states that perceived mobility has nega-
tive effects on OCB and minimal effect on in-role performance. In agreement
with the hypothesis, perceived mobility has negative effects on OCB ( .15,
p .05). Employees who perceived a vast variety of outside job opportunities
have a lower tendency to exhibit extra-role behaviors. Meanwhile, perceived

FIG. 2. Estimated path coefficients of the structural model.

 ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR 15

job mobility does not have significant effects on in-role performance. Hypothesis
2 is also supported.
With respect to the effect of negative affectivity on OCB, hypothesis 3 states
that negative affectivity has negative effects on LMX and perceived mobility.
The results support hypothesis 3a but not 3b. Negative affectivity has negative
effects on LMX ( .22, p .01) but positive effects on perceived job mobility
( .32, p .01). Employees with the disposition of reacting negatively would
have lower LMX with their supervisors. They would have, however, a more
positive perception of outside job opportunities. Our final hypothesis (H4) states
that negative affectivity would not have an effect on OCB after controlling for
perceived mobility and LMX. This hypothesis was tested by a nested model
testing procedure by adding the structural path from negative affectivity to
OCB in the model presented in Figure 1 and comparing this model to that in
Fig. 1. The results show that adding this path did not improve model fit,
as the resulting change in model chi-square was 2.43 (df 1), which was
statistically insignificant. In other words, the direct path from negative affec-
tivity to OCB can be considered statistically redundant. Hypothesis 4 is there-
fore supported.
The variance explained in each of the endogenous variables in the model
was as follows: in-role performance, 3%; OCB, 9%; LMX, 5%; and perceived
job mobility, 10%.

DISCUSSION

The present study examined a new cognitive antecedent of OCBperceived

job mobilityand contrasted the mediating effects of this new antecedent and
LMX on the relationship between negative affectivity and OCB in a Chinese
context. Consistent with prior research, LMX was found to predict both OCB
and in-role performance. LMX was also found to mediate the effects of negative
affectivity on performance. Perceived job mobility was found to predict OCB
but not in-role performance. Furthermore, perceived job mobility mediated the
relationship between negative affectivity and OCB. These findings suggested
that researchers should pay more attention to how disposition may affect OCB.
As discussed above, we argue that disposition may affect OCB via employees
organizational experiences or perception of organizational reality.
One related research issue is whether LMX mediates the effects of other
dispositional antecedents on OCB like it does on negative affectivity. This is a
question that should be addressed in future research. Future research may
also examine more closely the process through which LMX affects OCB. For
example, research may continue to examine the relationship between perceived
organizational support, LMX, perceived justice, and OCB (e.g., Wayne et al.,
1997; Moorman, Blakely, & Niehoff, 1998). Wayne et al. (1997) found that
LMX and perceived organizational support (i.e., the perception of how well an
organization supports an employee, which can be a proxy for the effectiveness
of organizational human resource practices) were interrelated and that both
were related to OCB. Moorman et al. (1998) found that procedural justice
16 HUI, LAW, AND CHEN

affected OCB by influencing perceived organizational support. It appears proba-

ble that interactive justice and procedural justice affect OCB by influencing
LMX and perceived organizational support, respectively. Since interactive jus-
tice deals with the interaction between leaders and members, it may have a
stronger impact on LMX than on perceived organizational support. Procedural
justice, on the other hand, is organizationally based and may have stronger
impact on perceived organizational support than on LMX. Examining the differ-
ential effects of leader versus organizational practices on OCB should further
contribute to our understanding of the exchange process between the organiza-
tion and the individual.
Theoretically, it is also important to examine how a relationship, e.g., leader
member exchange, affects behaviors that are more organizationally than leader
relevant. By definition, OCB is behavior that, in aggregate, would promote the
efficiency and effectiveness of an organization. The leadermember relation-
ship, by nature, is not an organizational-level variable even though we sug-
gested above that the relationship between an organization and its members
may be embodied in the relationship between a supervisor and a subordinate.
Future research should provide more complete treatment of the relationship
between the organization, supervisor, and member, and investigate how such
cross-level relationships affect OCB. It is possible that there is a class of extra-
role behaviors that are supervisor specific. Such behavior may, but not necessar-
ily, promote the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization in the aggregate,
even though such behavior may promote the effectiveness and efficiency of
supervisors. Williams and Anderson (1991) have distinguished OCB into OCBI,
which reflects citizenship behavior that is directed toward individuals, and
OCBO, which reflects citizenship behavior that is directed toward organiza-
tions. Moorman et al. (1998) have suggested that researchers may examine
how LMX and perceived organizational support relate to OCB that is directed
towards individuals versus that toward organizations.
As a new construct in the literature of OCB, perceived job mobility was found
to be a significant predictor of extra-role behaviors. We believe that perceived
job mobility is an interesting and important variable because it is a perception
or appraisal that many employees would have at some point of their organiza-
tional tenure. The manner by which we suggest that perceived job mobility
relates to OCB raises a theoretical issue. Recall that we suggested that, follow-
ing the side-bet theory, employees who perceive low job mobility may continue
their OCB so as to protect their investment in the organization. This may
appear to be inconsistent with the notion that OCB is discretionary in nature.
We argue that this is not a contradiction but instead implies a different way
of understanding what may induce OCB. Specifically, performing OCB may
have instrumental values. Even though OCB is discretionary, employees typi-
cally do exhibit some of this type of behavior and they may exhibit OCB as a
means to obtain some ends. For example, employees may perform OCB to
impress their supervisors, as extra-role performance may influence employees
overall performance evaluations (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Hui, 1993) and
decisions about their promotion, training, and compensation (Park & Sims,
 ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR 17

1989). If this is indeed the case, then identifying situations (e.g., low perceived
job mobility) in which OCB may have instrumentality will enhance our under-
standing of the antecedents of OCB.
The positive relationship between negative affectivity and perceived job mo-
bility was not expected. Indeed, we hypothesized a negative relationship. One
explanation for this finding is that it is due to random error. However, we
believe that random error is not a likely explanation for two reasons. First,
correlations that are produced by random error are likely to be relatively small.
The size of the correlation between negativity affectivity and perceived job
mobility is not small relative to other correlations found in the present study.
Second, there may be good reasons that negative affectivity relates negatively
to perceived job mobility. Indeed, we might have been too simplistic in hypothe-
sizing the possible effects of negative affectivity on perceived job mobility. Recall
that we assume that people who tend to respond negatively to stimuli may
have more pessimistic views of the external job environment. This may not be
necessarily true. People with negative affectivity are more likely to be critical of
their work environment and thus more likely to scan for other job opportunities.
Consequently, they have higher perceived job mobility. Furthermore, negative
affectivity may affect perceived job mobility in indirect ways. People with
negative affectivity may pay more attention to what happens in the external
world relative to those with low negative affectivity because they are not satis-
fied with their present situation. Such attention may lead them to realize
the opportunities, including job opportunities, in their external world. Future
research may benefit from examining the manner in which dispositional vari-
ables such as negative affectivity affect peoples perceptions of organiza-
tional reality.
Future research may also benefit from identifying both promoters and inhibi-
tors of OCB and studying how the two work together to affect OCB. As discussed
above, it is more customary to think about promoters than inhibitors in OCB
research. In organizational contexts, however, it is likely that there are factors
that counteract the effects of positive antecedents of OCB. The present study
identifies one such factorperceived job mobilityand shows that this factor
relates to OCB. Future research may study the simultaneous effects of more
promoters and inhibitors of OCB closely to yield a more holistic understanding
of what motivates (or inhibits) OCB.
A caveat should be discussed regarding the interpretation of the lack of a
relationship between perceived job mobility and in-role performance. Recall
that one of our hypotheses, H2b, is a null hypothesis. This hypothesis states
that perceived job mobility would have minimal effects on in-role performance.
It is certainly not a conventional practice to argue for the support of a null
hypothesis. The lack of an effect between any given set of variables may be
due to many reasons, among which statistical artifacts are important. For
example, we may have committed a Type I error. Furthermore, it is more likely
that the null hypothesis is supported than rejected. Thus, findings pertaining
to this hypothesis have to be interpreted carefully. We believe, however, that
it is meaningful to consider this hypothesis in the present study because we
18 HUI, LAW, AND CHEN

are contrasting the effects of perceived job mobility and LMX on both in-role
performance and OCB, and we argue for different effects of the two antecedents
on the two types of performance. The patterns of results indicate that the effects
of these two antecedents on in-role performance and OCB are indeed different.
A final point worth discussing is the sample used in this study. The present
study was conducted in China using Chinese subjects. It is possible that culture
had an effect on these findings. We contend, however, that although the present
study was conducted in a Chinese context, this should not bias the interpreta-
tions of our findings. It is possible that the relationship between LMX and
OCB is inflated in a Chinese sample because Chinese are known to value
interpersonal relationships. We argue that this is a minor concern. Specifically,
as discussed above, LMX has been shown to relate to a number of important
organizational outcomes in the United States. Thus, we have no particular
reason to believe that LMX would not have such effects in a different culture,
including effects on extra-role performance in China. Patterns of relationships
identified in one culture cannot be assumed to be invariant across cultures.
Examining theories or hypotheses across cultural boundaries, thus, is im-
portant. Future research would benefit from similar studies using samples
from various cultures and nationalities.

APPENDIX

OCB items used in the present study are as follows:

Altruism toward colleagues
1. Willing to assist new colleagues in adjusting to the work environment.
2. Willing to help colleagues solve work-related problems.
3. Willing to cover work assignments for colleagues when needed.
Conscientiousness
4. Takes ones job seriously and rarely makes mistakes.
5. Complies with company rules and procedures even when nobody is
watching and no evidence can be traced.
6. Does not mind taking on new or challenging assignments.
Identification with company
7. Eager to tell outsiders good news about the company and clarify their
misunderstandings.
8. Makes constructive suggestions that can improve the operation of
the company.
9. Actively attends company meetings.
Interpersonal harmony
10. Often speaks ill of the supervisor or colleagues behind their backs.
11. Uses illicit tactics to seek personal influence and gain with harmful
effect on interpersonal harmony in the organization.
12. Takes credit, avoids blame, and fights fiercely for personal gain.
Protecting company resources
13. Conducts personal business on company time (e.g., trading stocks,
shopping, going to barber shops).
 ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR 19

14. Uses company resources to do personal business (e.g., company

phones, copy machines, computers, and cars).
15. Views sick leave as a benefit and makes excuses for taking sick leave.

REFERENCES

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Barnard, C. I. (1938). Functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
Bateman, T. S., & Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relationship
between affect and employee citizenship. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 587595.
Becker, H. S. (1960). Notes on the concept of commitment. American Journal of Sociology, 66, 3234.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107,
238246.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonnett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of
covariance structure. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588606.
Bentler, P. M., & Chou, C. P. (1987). Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociological Methods &
Research, 16, 78117.
Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In H. C.
Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: Vol. 2. Methodology (pp.
349444). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Cohen, A., & Lowenberg, G. A. (1990). Re-examination of the side-bet theory as applied to organiza-
tional commitment: A meta-analysis. Human Relations, 43, 10151050.
Dansereau, F., Graen, G. B., & Haga, W. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership
in formal organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 4678.
Dunn, W. S., Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., & Ones, D. S. (1995). Relative importance of personality
and general mental ability in managers judgments of applicant qualifications. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 80, 500509
Farh, J. L., Earley, P. C., & Lin, S. (1997). Impetus for extraordinary action: A cultural analysis of
justice and extra-role behavior in Chinese society. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 421444.
George, J. M., & Brief, A. P. (1992). Feeling gooddoing good: A conceptual analysis of the mood
at work-organizational spontaneity relationship. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 310329.
Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988). An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating
unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, 25, 186192.
Graen, G. B., & Cashman, J. (1975). A role-making model of leadership in formal organizations:
A developmental approach. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership frontiers (pp.
143166). Kent, OH: Kent State Univ. Press.
Graen, G. B., Novak, M., & Sommerkamp, P. (1982). The effects of leadermember exchange and
job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model. Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance, 30, 109131.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of
leadermember exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level
multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219247.
Herman, J. B. (1973). Are situational contingencies limiting job-attitudejob performance relation-
ships? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 10, 208224.
Hulin, C. L., Roznowski, M., & Hachiya, D. (1985). Alternative opportunities and withdrawal
decisions: Empirical and theoretical discrepancies and an integration. Psychological Bulletin,
97, 233250.
Hwang, K. K. (1987). Face and face: The Chinese power game. American Journal of Sociology,
92, 944974.
20 HUI, LAW, AND CHEN

Jacobs, J. B. (1980). The concept of guanxi and local politics in a rural Chinese cultural setting.
In S. L. Greenblatt, R. W. Wilson, & A. A. Wilson (Eds.) Social interaction in Chinese society.
New York: Praeger.

Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1986). LISREL VI: Analysis of linear structural relationships by
maximum likelihood and least square methods. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software Interna-
tional, Inc.

Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8:Structural Equation Modeling with the SIMPLIS
Command Language. Chicago:Scientific Software International, Inc.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.
Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Mobley, W. H. (1998). Towards a taxonomy of multidimensional constructs.
Academy of Management Review, 23, 741755.
MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Fetter, R. (1991). Organizational citizenship behavior and
objective productivity as determinants of managerial evaluations of salespersons performance.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 123150.
Mathieu, J. E. & Farr, J. L. (1991). Further evidence for the discriminant validity of measures of
organizational commitment, job involvement, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology,
76, 127133.
Mathieu, J. E., Hofmann, D. A., & Farr, J. L. (1993). Job perceptionjob satisfaction relations:
An empirical comparison of three competing theories. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 56, 370387.
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1984). Testing the side-bet theory of organizational commitment:
Some methodological considerations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 372378.
Mobley, W. H., Griffeth, R. W., Hand, H. H., & Meglino, B. M. (1979). Review and conceptual
analysis of the employee turnover process. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 493522.
Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship
behavior: Does fairness perception influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychol-
ogy, 6, 845855.
Moorman, R. H., Blakely, G. L., & Niehoff, B. P. (1998). Does perceived organizational support
mediate the relationship between procedural justice and organizational citizenship behavior?
Academy of Management Journal, 41, 351357.
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington,
MA: Heath.
Organ, D. W. (1990). The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior. In B. Staw,
L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 12, pp. 4372).
Organ, D. W., & Konovsky, M. (1989). Cognitive versus affective determinants of organizational
citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 157164.
Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors
of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48, 775802.
Park, O.-S., & Sims, H. P. Jr. (1989). Beyond cognition in leadership: Prosocial behavior and affect
in managerial judgment. Unpublished manuscript, Seoul National University and Pennsylvania
State University.
Podsakoff, P. M., & Mackenzie, S. B. (1993). Citizenship behavior and fairness in organizations:
Issues and directions for future research. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 6,
257269.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Hui, C. (1993). Organizational Citizenship Behaviors and
managerial evaluations of employee performance: A review and suggestions for future research.
In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 11, pp.
140). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader
behaviors and their effects on followers trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizen-
ship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1, 107142.
 ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR 21

Roethlisberger, F. J., & Dickson, W. J. (1939). Management and the worker. New York: Wiley.
Rusbalt, C. E., & Farell, D. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The impact on
job satisfaction, job commitment, and turnover of variations in rewards, costs, alternatives, and
investments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 429438.
Scandura, T. A., & Graen, G. B. (1984). Moderating effects of initial leadermember exchange
status on the effects of a leadership intervention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 428436.
Schriesheim, C. A., & Gardiner, C. C. (1992). An exploration of the discriminant validity of the
leadermember exchange scale (LMX7) commonly used in organizational research. In M.
Schnake (Ed.), Proceedings of the southern management association (pp. 9193). Valdosta, GA:
Southern Management Association.
Settoon, R. P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: Perceived
organizational support, leadermember exchange, and employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 81, 219227.
Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature
and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653663.
Tansky, J. W. (1993). Justice and organizational citizenship behavior: What is the relationship?
Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 6, 195207.
Tett, R. P., Jackson, D. N., & Rothstein, M. (1991). Personality measures as predictors of job
performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 44, 703742.
Tierney, P., & Bauer, T. N. (1996). A longitudinal assessment of LMX on extra-role behavior. Paper
presented at the Annual Conference of the Academy of Management, Cincinnati.
Wall, J. A. (1990). Managers in the Peoples Republic of China. Academy of Management Executive,
4, 1932.
Wallance, J. E. (1997). Beckers side-bet theory of commitment revisited: Is it time for a moratorium
or a resurrection? Human Relations, 6, 727749.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegan, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of
positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
54, 10631070.
Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader-
member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 82111.
Williams, L. J. (1988). Affective and nonaffective components of job satisfaction and organizational
commitment as determinants of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as
predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17,
601617.
Yang, K. S., & Cheng, B. S. (1987). Confucian values, individual modernity, and organizational
behavior: An empirical test of the post-Confucian hypotheses. Bulletin of the Institute of Ethnology
Academia Sinica, 64, 149. [in Chinese]

Received: February 25, 1998