Clarifying the inconsistently observed curvilinear relationship between workload and employee attitudes and mental well-being

IF 5.6 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED

Work and Stress Pub Date : 2022-09-16 DOI:10.1080/02678373.2022.2120562

Shani Pindek, W. Shen, Cheryl E. Gray, Paul E. Spector

{"title":"Clarifying the inconsistently observed curvilinear relationship between workload and employee attitudes and mental well-being","authors":"Shani Pindek, W. Shen, Cheryl E. Gray, Paul E. Spector","doi":"10.1080/02678373.2022.2120562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Despite converging theoretical arguments regarding non-linear relationships between workload and employee attitudes (i.e. job satisfaction) and mental well-being outcomes, prior empirical support for these curvilinear effects has been mixed. In this study we offer and test two potential explanations that may help to reconcile this discrepancy. First, existing workload scales do not assess the full range of workload, thereby making it difficult to detect curvilinear relationships. Second, outcomes typically examined are too distal and there are different mediators (i.e. boredom and frustration) that explain effects at the low and high ends of the workload continuum, respectively, which also serves to obscure curvilinear effects. We examined these possibilities in two North American samples (N = 499 and 493) that employed different designs (i.e. cross-sectional versus multi-wave surveys). Overall, we find support for our hypotheses; ability to detect curvilinear effects is enhanced when using too much/too little rating scales that capture the entire workload continuum. Furthermore, boredom mediated the impact of low workload on outcomes, whereas frustration mediated the impact of high workload on outcomes. Therefore, this study helps clarify why prior studies may have inconsistently observed non-linear relationships between workload and outcomes. We discuss the implications for both researchers and practitioners.","PeriodicalId":48199,"journal":{"name":"Work and Stress","volume":"37 1","pages":"195 - 221"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Work and Stress","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2022.2120562","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT Despite converging theoretical arguments regarding non-linear relationships between workload and employee attitudes (i.e. job satisfaction) and mental well-being outcomes, prior empirical support for these curvilinear effects has been mixed. In this study we offer and test two potential explanations that may help to reconcile this discrepancy. First, existing workload scales do not assess the full range of workload, thereby making it difficult to detect curvilinear relationships. Second, outcomes typically examined are too distal and there are different mediators (i.e. boredom and frustration) that explain effects at the low and high ends of the workload continuum, respectively, which also serves to obscure curvilinear effects. We examined these possibilities in two North American samples (N = 499 and 493) that employed different designs (i.e. cross-sectional versus multi-wave surveys). Overall, we find support for our hypotheses; ability to detect curvilinear effects is enhanced when using too much/too little rating scales that capture the entire workload continuum. Furthermore, boredom mediated the impact of low workload on outcomes, whereas frustration mediated the impact of high workload on outcomes. Therefore, this study helps clarify why prior studies may have inconsistently observed non-linear relationships between workload and outcomes. We discuss the implications for both researchers and practitioners.

查看原文本刊更多论文

澄清工作量与员工态度和心理健康之间不一致的曲线关系

摘要尽管关于工作量和员工态度（即工作满意度）与心理健康结果之间的非线性关系的理论争论趋于一致，但先前对这些曲线效应的实证支持却喜忧参半。在这项研究中，我们提供并测试了两种可能有助于调和这种差异的解释。首先，现有的工作量量表无法评估全部工作量，因此很难检测曲线关系。其次，通常检查的结果过于遥远，有不同的中介（即无聊和沮丧）分别解释了工作量连续体低端和高端的影响，这也掩盖了曲线效应。我们在两个北美样本（N = 499和493），其采用不同的设计（即横截面与多波勘测）。总的来说，我们发现我们的假设得到了支持；当使用过多/过少的评分尺度来捕捉整个工作负载连续体时，检测曲线效果的能力得到了增强。此外，无聊介导了低工作量对结果的影响，而沮丧介导了高工作量对结果影响。因此，这项研究有助于澄清为什么先前的研究可能不一致地观察到工作量和结果之间的非线性关系。我们讨论了对研究人员和从业者的影响。

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

Work and Stress PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED-

CiteScore

11.70

自引率

3.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： Work & Stress is an international, multidisciplinary quarterly presenting high-quality papers concerned with the psychological, social and organizational aspects of occupational health and well-being, and stress and safety management. It is published in association with the European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology. The journal publishes empirical reports, scholarly reviews and theoretical papers. It is directed at occupational health psychologists, work and organizational psychologists, those involved with organizational development, and all concerned with the interplay of work, health and organisations. Research published in Work & Stress relates psychologically salient features of the work environment to their psychological, behavioural and health consequences, focusing on the underlying psychological processes. The journal has become a natural home for research on the work-family interface, social relations at work (including topics such as bullying and conflict at work, leadership and organizational support), workplace interventions and reorganizations, and dimensions and outcomes of worker stress and well-being. Such dimensions and outcomes, both positive and negative, include stress, burnout, sickness absence, work motivation, work engagement and work performance. Of course, submissions addressing other topics in occupational health psychology are also welcomed.