Coping with work-nonwork stressors over time: A person-centered, multistudy integration of coping breadth and depth.

IF 9.4 1区 心理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Journal of Applied Psychology Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-23 DOI:10.1037/apl0001207
Catherine E Kleshinski, Kelly Schwind Wilson, Julia M Stevenson-Street, Lindsay Mechem Rosokha
{"title":"Coping with work-nonwork stressors over time: A person-centered, multistudy integration of coping breadth and depth.","authors":"Catherine E Kleshinski, Kelly Schwind Wilson, Julia M Stevenson-Street, Lindsay Mechem Rosokha","doi":"10.1037/apl0001207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Coping is a dynamic response to stressors that employees encounter in their work and nonwork roles. Scholars have argued that it is not just whether employees cope with work-nonwork stressors-but how they cope-that matters. Indeed, prior research assumes that adaptive coping strategies-planning, prioritizing, positive reframing, seeking emotional and instrumental support-are universally beneficial, suggesting that sustaining high levels of these strategies is ideal. By returning to the roots of coping theory, we adopt a person-centered, dynamic approach using latent profile analysis and latent transition analysis across three multiwave studies (<i>N</i> = 1,370) to consider whether employees combine coping strategies and how remaining in or shifting between such combinations also matters. In a pilot study (<i>N</i> = 361), we explored profiles and their transitions during a time frame punctuated with macrolevel transitions that amplified employees' work-nonwork stressors (i.e., COVID-19), which revealed three profiles at Time 1 (<i>comprehensive copers, emotion-focused copers,</i> and <i>individualistic copers)</i> and a fourth profile at Time 2 <i>(surviving copers</i>). In Study 1 (<i>N</i> = 648), across all three time points, we replicated three profiles and found evidence for <i>constrained copers</i> instead of emotion-focused copers. In Study 2 (<i>N</i> = 361), across both time points, we replicated all four profiles from Study 1 and tested hypotheses regarding the profiles, their transition patterns, and implications of such patterns for work, well-being, and social functioning outcomes. Altogether, our work suggests that maintaining high-coping depth or increasing depth is generally beneficial, whereas maintaining or increasing coping breadth is generally harmful. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"1765-1793"},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001207","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Coping is a dynamic response to stressors that employees encounter in their work and nonwork roles. Scholars have argued that it is not just whether employees cope with work-nonwork stressors-but how they cope-that matters. Indeed, prior research assumes that adaptive coping strategies-planning, prioritizing, positive reframing, seeking emotional and instrumental support-are universally beneficial, suggesting that sustaining high levels of these strategies is ideal. By returning to the roots of coping theory, we adopt a person-centered, dynamic approach using latent profile analysis and latent transition analysis across three multiwave studies (N = 1,370) to consider whether employees combine coping strategies and how remaining in or shifting between such combinations also matters. In a pilot study (N = 361), we explored profiles and their transitions during a time frame punctuated with macrolevel transitions that amplified employees' work-nonwork stressors (i.e., COVID-19), which revealed three profiles at Time 1 (comprehensive copers, emotion-focused copers, and individualistic copers) and a fourth profile at Time 2 (surviving copers). In Study 1 (N = 648), across all three time points, we replicated three profiles and found evidence for constrained copers instead of emotion-focused copers. In Study 2 (N = 361), across both time points, we replicated all four profiles from Study 1 and tested hypotheses regarding the profiles, their transition patterns, and implications of such patterns for work, well-being, and social functioning outcomes. Altogether, our work suggests that maintaining high-coping depth or increasing depth is generally beneficial, whereas maintaining or increasing coping breadth is generally harmful. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

长期应对工作与非工作压力:以人为本,多研究整合应对的广度和深度。
应对是员工对在工作和非工作中遇到的压力做出的动态反应。学者们认为,重要的不仅仅是员工是否应对工作和非工作压力,而是他们如何应对。事实上,先前的研究认为,适应性应对策略--计划、优先排序、积极重塑、寻求情感和工具支持--是普遍有益的,这表明保持高水平的这些策略是理想的。通过回归应对理论的根源,我们采用了一种以人为本的动态方法,在三项多波研究(样本数 = 1,370)中使用了潜在概况分析和潜在转变分析,以考虑员工是否结合了应对策略,以及如何保持或在这些策略组合之间进行转换。在一项试点研究(样本数=361)中,我们探讨了在宏观层面的转变(即 COVID-19)放大了员工的工作-非工作压力因素的时间框架内,员工的应对策略及其转变情况,结果显示在时间 1 有三种应对策略(综合应对策略、情绪专注应对策略和个人主义应对策略),在时间 2 有第四种应对策略(生存应对策略)。在研究 1(样本数 = 648)中,在所有三个时间点上,我们复制了三个特征,并发现了受限应对者而非情绪专注应对者的证据。在研究 2(N = 361)中,我们在两个时间点上复制了研究 1 中的所有四种情况,并检验了有关这些情况、其过渡模式以及这些模式对工作、幸福感和社会功能结果的影响的假设。总之,我们的研究表明,保持高应对深度或增加应对深度通常是有益的,而保持或增加应对广度通常是有害的。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
175
期刊介绍: The Journal of Applied Psychology® focuses on publishing original investigations that contribute new knowledge and understanding to fields of applied psychology (excluding clinical and applied experimental or human factors, which are better suited for other APA journals). The journal primarily considers empirical and theoretical investigations that enhance understanding of cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral psychological phenomena in work and organizational settings. These phenomena can occur at individual, group, organizational, or cultural levels, and in various work settings such as business, education, training, health, service, government, or military institutions. The journal welcomes submissions from both public and private sector organizations, for-profit or nonprofit. It publishes several types of articles, including: 1.Rigorously conducted empirical investigations that expand conceptual understanding (original investigations or meta-analyses). 2.Theory development articles and integrative conceptual reviews that synthesize literature and generate new theories on psychological phenomena to stimulate novel research. 3.Rigorously conducted qualitative research on phenomena that are challenging to capture with quantitative methods or require inductive theory building.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信