领导水平和性别对领导者幸福感的影响。

IF 5.9 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
Jing Hu, Tony Huiquan Zhang, Chris J Jackson
{"title":"领导水平和性别对领导者幸福感的影响。","authors":"Jing Hu,&nbsp;Tony Huiquan Zhang,&nbsp;Chris J Jackson","doi":"10.1037/ocp0000361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Previous research examining differences in levels of well-being between leaders and nonleaders has yielded mixed results. To explain the inconsistencies, we compare levels of well-being among nonleaders, mid-level leaders, and high-level leaders. Drawing from the job demands-resources model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007, 2017) and the expanded version proposed by Crawford et al. (2010), we anticipate mid-level leaders will have lower levels of well-being compared to senior leaders and nonleaders, and females will be more vulnerable than males in mid-level leadership. In Study 1, we use multilevel models and propensity score matching (N = 24,067) and find mid-level leaders have worse general health conditions compared to nonleaders and high-level leaders, and that this effect is more pronounced among females. In Study 2, we collect experience sampling data from workers (N = 86; 1,634 observations) who completed a short survey four times daily for five consecutive working days. Mid-level leaders report more end-of-day negative emotions than high-level leaders and nonleaders, mediated by higher job demands and lower levels of job control to combat the negative effects of job demands; an effect that is particularly pronounced among female respondents. In Study 3, we use a two-wave time-lagged survey study (N = 330) and find middle managers have more challenge and hindrance job demands than nonleaders, and insufficient job control to offset the negative effects of job demands. Female middle managers report the most physical health symptoms and enjoy less eudaemonic well-being than their male counterparts. We conclude that leadership levels and gender have important and overlooked impacts on well-being. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48339,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Occupational Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effects of leadership levels and gender on leader well-being.\",\"authors\":\"Jing Hu,&nbsp;Tony Huiquan Zhang,&nbsp;Chris J Jackson\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/ocp0000361\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Previous research examining differences in levels of well-being between leaders and nonleaders has yielded mixed results. To explain the inconsistencies, we compare levels of well-being among nonleaders, mid-level leaders, and high-level leaders. Drawing from the job demands-resources model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007, 2017) and the expanded version proposed by Crawford et al. (2010), we anticipate mid-level leaders will have lower levels of well-being compared to senior leaders and nonleaders, and females will be more vulnerable than males in mid-level leadership. In Study 1, we use multilevel models and propensity score matching (N = 24,067) and find mid-level leaders have worse general health conditions compared to nonleaders and high-level leaders, and that this effect is more pronounced among females. In Study 2, we collect experience sampling data from workers (N = 86; 1,634 observations) who completed a short survey four times daily for five consecutive working days. Mid-level leaders report more end-of-day negative emotions than high-level leaders and nonleaders, mediated by higher job demands and lower levels of job control to combat the negative effects of job demands; an effect that is particularly pronounced among female respondents. In Study 3, we use a two-wave time-lagged survey study (N = 330) and find middle managers have more challenge and hindrance job demands than nonleaders, and insufficient job control to offset the negative effects of job demands. Female middle managers report the most physical health symptoms and enjoy less eudaemonic well-being than their male counterparts. We conclude that leadership levels and gender have important and overlooked impacts on well-being. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48339,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Occupational Health Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Occupational Health Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000361\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Occupational Health Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000361","RegionNum":1,"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: 0

摘要

先前的研究考察了领导者和非领导者之间幸福感水平的差异,结果喜忧参半。为了解释这种不一致性,我们比较了非领导人、中层领导人和高层领导人的幸福感水平。根据工作需求-资源模型(Bakker&Demerouti,20072017)和Crawford等人提出的扩展版本。(2010),我们预计,与高级领导和非领导相比,中层领导的幸福感水平将较低,在中层领导中,女性将比男性更脆弱。在研究1中,我们使用了多层次模型和倾向得分匹配(N=24067),发现与非领导者和高层领导者相比,中层领导者的总体健康状况更差,而且这种影响在女性中更为明显。在研究2中,我们收集了工人的经验抽样数据(N=86;1634次观察),他们连续五个工作日每天完成四次简短调查。中层领导比高层领导和非领导报告更多的负面情绪,这是由更高的工作需求和更低的工作控制水平来调节的,以对抗工作需求的负面影响;这种影响在女性受访者中尤为明显。在研究3中,我们使用了两波时间滞后的调查研究(N=330),发现中层管理者比非领导者有更多的挑战和阻碍工作需求,并且没有足够的工作控制来抵消工作需求的负面影响。女性中层管理者报告的身体健康症状最多,享受的幸福感不如男性。我们得出的结论是,领导水平和性别对幸福感有着重要而被忽视的影响。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The effects of leadership levels and gender on leader well-being.

Previous research examining differences in levels of well-being between leaders and nonleaders has yielded mixed results. To explain the inconsistencies, we compare levels of well-being among nonleaders, mid-level leaders, and high-level leaders. Drawing from the job demands-resources model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007, 2017) and the expanded version proposed by Crawford et al. (2010), we anticipate mid-level leaders will have lower levels of well-being compared to senior leaders and nonleaders, and females will be more vulnerable than males in mid-level leadership. In Study 1, we use multilevel models and propensity score matching (N = 24,067) and find mid-level leaders have worse general health conditions compared to nonleaders and high-level leaders, and that this effect is more pronounced among females. In Study 2, we collect experience sampling data from workers (N = 86; 1,634 observations) who completed a short survey four times daily for five consecutive working days. Mid-level leaders report more end-of-day negative emotions than high-level leaders and nonleaders, mediated by higher job demands and lower levels of job control to combat the negative effects of job demands; an effect that is particularly pronounced among female respondents. In Study 3, we use a two-wave time-lagged survey study (N = 330) and find middle managers have more challenge and hindrance job demands than nonleaders, and insufficient job control to offset the negative effects of job demands. Female middle managers report the most physical health symptoms and enjoy less eudaemonic well-being than their male counterparts. We conclude that leadership levels and gender have important and overlooked impacts on well-being. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Journal of Occupational Health Psychology offers research, theory, and public policy articles in occupational health psychology, an interdisciplinary field representing a broad range of backgrounds, interests, and specializations. Occupational health psychology concerns the application of psychology to improving the quality of work life and to protecting and promoting the safety, health, and well-being of workers. This journal focuses on the work environment, the individual, and the work-family interface.
×
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