Employee Health, Coping and Methodologies (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 5)

EMPLOYEE HEALTH, COPING AND METHODOLOGIES

i

RESEARCH IN OCCUPATIONAL STRESS AND WELL BEING Series Editors: Pamela L. Perrewe´ and Daniel C. Ganster Volume 1: Volume 2: Volume 3: Volume 4:

Exploring Theoretical Mechanisms and Perspectives Historical and Current Perspectives on Stress and Health Emotional and Physiological Processes and Positive Intervention Strategies Exploring Interpersonal Dynamics

ii

RESEARCH IN OCCUPATIONAL STRESS AND WELL BEING VOLUME 5

EMPLOYEE HEALTH, COPING AND METHODOLOGIES EDITED BY

PAMELA L. PERREWE´ Florida State University, USA

DANIEL C. GANSTER University of Arkansas, USA

Amsterdam – Boston – Heidelberg – London – New York – Oxford Paris – San Diego – San Francisco – Singapore – Sydney – Tokyo iii

ELSEVIER B.V. Radarweg 29 P.O. Box 211 1000 AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands

ELSEVIER Inc. 525 B Street, Suite 1900 San Diego CA 92101-4495 USA

ELSEVIER Ltd The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington Oxford OX5 1GB UK

ELSEVIER Ltd 84 Theobalds Road London WC1X 8RR UK

r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This work is protected under copyright by Elsevier Ltd, and the following terms and conditions apply to its use: Photocopying Single photocopies of single chapters may be made for personal use as allowed by national copyright laws. Permission of the Publisher and payment of a fee is required for all other photocopying, including multiple or systematic copying, copying for advertising or promotional purposes, resale, and all forms of document delivery. Special rates are available for educational institutions that wish to make photocopies for non-profit educational classroom use. Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier’s Rights Department in Oxford, UK: phone (+44) 1865 843830, fax (+44) 1865 853333, e-mail: [email protected]. Requests may also be completed on-line via the Elsevier homepage (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/permissions). In the USA, users may clear permissions and make payments through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA; phone: (+1) (978) 7508400, fax: (+1) (978) 7504744, and in the UK through the Copyright Licensing Agency Rapid Clearance Service (CLARCS), 90 Tottenham Court Road, London W1P 0LP, UK; phone: (+44) 20 7631 5555; fax: (+44) 20 7631 5500. Other countries may have a local reprographic rights agency for payments. Derivative Works Tables of contents may be reproduced for internal circulation, but permission of the Publisher is required for external resale or distribution of such material. Permission of the Publisher is required for all other derivative works, including compilations and translations. Electronic Storage or Usage Permission of the Publisher is required to store or use electronically any material contained in this work, including any chapter or part of a chapter. Except as outlined above, no part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission of the Publisher. Address permissions requests to: Elsevier’s Rights Department, at the fax and e-mail addresses noted above. Notice No responsibility is assumed by the Publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions or ideas contained in the material herein. Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, in particular, independent verification of diagnoses and drug dosages should be made. First edition 2006 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record is available from the British Library. ISBN-10: 0-7623-1289-0 ISBN-13: 978-0-7623-1289-4 ISSN: 1479-3555 (Series)

∞ The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Permanence of Paper). Printed in The Netherlands.

Working together to grow libraries in developing countries www.elsevier.com | www.bookaid.org | www.sabre.org

iv

CONTENTS OVERVIEW Pamela L. Perrewe´ and Daniel C. Ganster ENDOCRINOLOGICAL PROCESSES ASSOCIATED WITH JOB STRESS: CATECHOLAMINE AND CORTISOL RESPONSES TO ACUTE AND CHRONIC STRESSORS Sabine Sonnentag and Charlotte Fritz HEALTH CONSEQUENCES OF WORK–FAMILY CONFLICT: THE DARK SIDE OF THE WORK– FAMILY INTERFACE Jeffrey H. Greenhaus, Tammy D. Allen and Paul E. Spector

vii

1

61

RELATIONSHIP OF THE NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION OF WORK HOURS TO HEALTH AND QUALITY-OF-LIFE (QOL) OUTCOMES Rosalind Chait Barnett

99

WORK STRESS, COPING RESOURCES, AND MENTAL HEALTH: A STUDY OF AMERICA’S BLACK ELITE Pamela Braboy Jackson and Tiffani Saunders

139

THE MANY ROLES OF CONTROL IN A STRESSOREMOTION THEORY OF COUNTERPRODUCTIVE WORK BEHAVIOR Suzy Fox and Paul E. Spector

171

v

vi

CONTENTS

THE ASSUMED LINEARITY OF ORGANIZATIONAL PHENOMENA: IMPLICATIONS FOR OCCUPATIONAL STRESS AND WELL-BEING Gerald R. Ferris, Michael G. Bowen, Darren C. Treadway, Wayne A. Hochwarter, Angela T. Hall and Pamela L. Perrewe´

203

LOCATING BEHAVIORAL CYNICISM AT WORK: CONSTRUCT ISSUES AND PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS Pamela Brandes and Diya Das

233

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS

267

OVERVIEW Occupational stress and well-being continues to be an intriguing and exciting area for researchers. In our 5th volume of Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, we offer outstanding papers that examine several key issues in occupational stress. The theme for this volume is employee health, coping and methodologies. The first four chapters take an in-depth look at the role of stress in physiological reactions and health consequences. The last three chapters examine the role of control and cynicism in occupational stress and also call for some new methodologies and the examination of nonlinear relationships in the study of occupational stress and well-being. The lead chapter of volume 5 is by Sabine Sonnentag and Charlotte Fritz. These authors examine the relationship between stressors and catecholamines (i.e., adrenaline and noradrenaline) and cortisol. Interestingly, they find that although acute stressors lead to elevated levels of catecholamines and cortisol, chronic stressors are less consistent. They suggest that chronic stressors may affect the responsivity to acute stressors. The next two chapters focus on work and health issues. The second chapter is by Jeffrey Greenhaus, Tammy Allen, and Paul Spector. They examine the literature on work–family conflict in regard to personal outcomes of health and well-being. Further, they propose a conceptual model that explains the psychological process by which work–family conflict affects negative emotions, dissatisfaction, health-related behaviors, and physical health. The third chapter is by Rosalind Barnett who examines work schedules in relation to health and quality of life outcomes. Specifically, she reviews the literature that connects the number of hours worked and the distribution of those hours to a variety of health outcomes for individuals as well as couples. Much of her attention is focused on the impact of work hours on employees as well as employees’ spouses. The fourth chapter, by Pamela Braboy Jackson and Tiffani Saunders, examines work stress, coping and mental health of America’s Black elites. They examine a unique sample of professional African-Americans in regard to a number of forms of work stress (i.e., perceived discrimination, token stress, role overload, role conflict, and scrutiny) and several indicators of mental health (i.e., depression, anxiety, somaticism). The results show that vii

viii

OVERVIEW

role stress and token stress are the more consistent predictors of mental health and that confrontation appears to be a beneficial strategy for handling work pressures among the Black elite. Coping by avoidance or hiding one’s feelings was found to be related to poor mental health. The final three chapters deal with control, cynicism, and methodological issues in regard to occupational stress and well-being. The fifth chapter, by Suzy Fox and Paul Spector, examines the numerous roles of control in the stressor-emotion model of counterproductive work behavior. They argue that a combination of stressors coupled with insufficient control is likely to trigger negative emotions that, in turn, increase the likelihood that employees will engage in counterproductive work behaviors. Fox and Spector also take an in-depth look at the various conceptualizations of control in the general stress, work stress, and counterproductive work behavior literature. The sixth chapter is by Gerald Ferris, Michael Bowen, Darren Treadway, Wayne Hochwarter, Angela Hall, and Pamela Perrewe´. These authors argue that theory and method are oftentimes intertwined in occupational-stress research and that there is an implicit assumption of linearity in the associations between stressors and strain. They review the stress literature that has acknowledged the potential for nonlinear relationships and offer empirical examples of restricted and non-restricted nonlinearity. They conclude with recommendations for researchers that extend beyond the examination of linear relationships exclusively. The final chapter, written by Pamela Brandes and Diya Das, examines the role of organizational cynicism in burnout, experienced stress, and antisocial behavior. This chapter also argues for the examination on nonlinear relationships. Specifically, they propose that cynical behavior has important, nonlinear effects on employee work performance. Further, they argue that cynical behavior serves as a coping strategy for employees and may attenuate the negative relationship between experienced stress and performance. Together, these chapters offer tremendous insight into the physiological and mental health of employees, counterproductive work behaviors, and performance. Further, several chapters specifically challenge the assumption of linearity in occupational-stress research. We hope you enjoy volume 5 of Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being. Pamela L. Perrewe´ and Daniel C. Ganster Series Editors

ENDOCRINOLOGICAL PROCESSES ASSOCIATED WITH JOB STRESS: CATECHOLAMINE AND CORTISOL RESPONSES TO ACUTE AND CHRONIC STRESSORS Sabine Sonnentag and Charlotte Fritz ABSTRACT In this chapter, we review empirical research evidence on the relationship between stressors and catecholamines (i.e., adrenaline and noradrenaline) and cortisol. With respect to acute stressors, both laboratory and field research have shown that the exposure to stressors leads to an increase in catecholamine and cortisol levels. With respect to more chronic stressors, research evidence is less consistent. Chronic mental workload was found to be related to elevated adrenaline levels. With respect to cortisol responses the interaction between workload and other variables seems to play a role. Empirical studies suggest that chronic stressors affect the responsivity to acute stressors. Research showed that after the exposure to stressors catecholamine and cortisol recovery is delayed.

Employee Health, Coping and Methodologies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 5, 1–59 Copyright r 2006 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(05)05001-8

1

2

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

INTRODUCTION It is nearly common knowledge that individuals respond to stressors with physiological and psychological reactions. Besides cardiovascular reactions such as changes in heart rate and blood pressure, neuroendocrinological reactions received much attention in empirical studies that examined reactions to psychological job stress. In this chapter, we summarize research evidence on such neuroendocrinological reactions. We focus on catecholamine (i.e., adrenaline and noradrenaline) and cortisol responses as potential responses to job stress. Specifically, we examine if and under which conditions job stressors and other work characteristics result in changes of catecholamine and cortisol levels. In addition, we address the question of which conditions might help in reducing elevated catecholamine and cortisol levels. There are at least two reasons why research on endocrinological processes is of high relevance for job stress research and other areas of occupational health psychology. First, endocrinological parameters are regarded as objective indicators of strain reactions. Therefore, they offer the opportunity to overcome some of the problems often encountered in studies on job stress. For decades, scholars have criticized problems associated with common method variance that result from the use of self-report measures for assessing both stressors and strains in the majority of job stress studies (Ganster & Schaubroeck, 1991; Kasl, 1978). Endocrinological measures may offer an escape from these problems because data on job stressors and on strain reactions originate from different sources (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). However, as others have demonstrated (Fried, Rowland, & Ferris, 1984; Semmer, Grebner, & Elfering, 2004) and as will become obvious in this chapter, the use of endocrinological measures is associated with its own difficulties. Therefore, endocrinological strain measures and self-report strain measures do not substitute for each other but might reflect different underlying processes or different aspects of stress responses. Second, the examination of endocrinological processes can help in developing a deeper understanding of why job stressors lead to health problems in the long run. Empirical evidence from longitudinal studies suggests that job stressors have negative effects on mental and physical health (for recent reviews see De Lange, Taris, Kompier, Houtman, & Bongers, 2003; Sonnentag & Frese, 2003). However, these longitudinal studies alone are relatively mute about the underlying mechanisms. Here, theoretical models and empirical studies on physiological processes can offer more insight. Specifically, the concept of allostatic load (McEwen, 1998; Seeman, Singer, Rowe, Horwitz, & McEwen, 1997) and approaches that link endocrinological responses to

Endocrinological Processes

3

impaired immune functioning (Stowell, McGuire, Robles, Glaser, & KiecoltGlaser, 2003) and impaired immune functioning in turn to the development of diseases (Cohen & Herbert, 1996) are of great relevance because they provide an explanation why job stressors and other unfavorable working conditions may lead to health problems (Ganster, Fox, & Dwyer, 2001). Empirical studies provide evidence that catecholamine and cortisol response patterns are related to poor health. For example, Sluiter, FringsDresen, van der Beek, and Meijman (2001) found that adrenaline baseline levels, cortisol reactivity during work, and slow cortisol recovery after work were related to health complaints. In a study with nurses, Elfering, Grebner, Semmer, and Gerber (2002) found positive relationships between noradrenaline levels before the end of the work day and low back pain. In a longitudinal study, Ganster et al. (2001) reported that elevated cortisol levels after work (but not during work) predicted subsequent health care costs. This chapter is organized as follows: First, we give an overview over the basic endocrinological processes in the context of a stress response. We briefly describe the functioning of the sympathetic–adrenal medullary (SAM) system and the hypothalamic–pituitary adrenocortical (HPA) axis and discuss some methodological issues. In the section that follows, we report findings from research that examined catecholamine and cortisol responses to acute stressors. When describing the findings we differentiate between laboratory and field studies. Then we turn to field studies that investigated the relationship between work characteristics and catecholamine and cortisol levels. Particularly, we focus on workload, job control, and social aspects of the workplace. In a brief section we discuss whether chronic stressors may not only change the baseline levels of the neuroendocrine parameters but may also affect responsivity to acute stressors. In a section that is devoted to recovery processes we give an overview of research that examined the pattern of catecholamine and cortisol levels after the stressor has ended. In the final section we suggest directions for future research.

THE ROLE OF CATECHOLAMINES AND CORTISOL IN THE STRESS RESPONSE Two neuroendocrine systems play a particular role in response to psychological stress: The SAM system and the HPA axis. The SAM system influences the secretion of the catecholamines adrenaline (epinephrine) and noradrenaline (norepinephrine) while the HPA axis is responsible for the secretion of glucocorticoids, particularly cortisol, in humans. It is important

4

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

to note that the SAM system and the HPA axis do not work in isolation, but rather show close interdependencies (Lovallo & Thomas, 2000). Here, we will briefly summarize the basic processes of the SAM system and the HPA axis. For interested readers, informative summaries provide more details (Lovallo & Thomas, 2000; Sapolsky, Romero, & Munck, 2000). Knowledge about the role of the SAM system in response to stress originated in research by Cannon (1914). He described the emergency function of the adrenal medulla and suggested the flight-or-fight response as a stress reaction. When an individual perceives an event as stressful, neurons in the hypothalamus affect autonomic centers in the lower brainstem and spinal cord. Sympathetic nerve endings release noradrenaline into various organs including the adrenal medulla where noradrenaline and adrenaline are secreted and enter the bloodstream. Selye (1956) accomplished pioneering work on the HPA axis by describing the general adaptation syndrome as an unspecific stress response. Later, Mason (1968) challenged the idea of unspecificity. Basically, the processes of the HPA axis can be described as follows: Neurons in the paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus produce a neuropeptide named corticotrophin releasing factor (CRF) that stimulates the anterior pituitary to release ACTH (and X-endorphin). ACTH in turn causes cortisol synthesis in the adrenal cortex that is then released into the bloodstream. In case of a stressful event, physiological stress reactions are initiated by the cerebral cortex that processes and evaluates sensory input. The amygdala has a crucial function in the stress process by activating the hippocampus, by eliciting autonomous and neuroendocrine responses via the hypothalamus, and by initiating feedback to the cortex and the limbic system. The activation of the SAM system and the HPA axis does not only reflect the organism’s response to stress, but is also important for normal homeostasis and metabolic processes (Lovallo & Thomas, 2000). Catecholamines and cortisol stimulate the mobilization of energy, provide blood sugar for physical and mental activities, and improve blood circulation. Thus, catecholamines and cortisol initiate and stimulate processes that help the organism to meet demands. Therefore, in demanding situations, catecholamines and cortisol secretion can be regarded as an adaptive response. Cortisol shows a strong circadian pattern with its peak in the early morning (Stone et al., 2001), while the circadian pattern of catecholamines is less pronounced with a tendency to peak in the middle of the day (van der Beek, Meijman, Frings-Dresen, Kuiper, & Kuiper, 1995). These facts are important when interpreting study findings and imply that comparisons of catecholamine and particularly of cortisol levels within the day should be considered

Endocrinological Processes

5

with greatest caution. Various approaches are available for measuring catecholamines and cortisol. Both parameters can be assessed in blood and in urine. In addition, cortisol can be measured in saliva (Kirschbaum & Hellhammer, 1989). Blood and salivary measures reflect short-term changes of stress and are therefore suitable for assessing the effects of acute stressors. Urinary assessments provide integrated measures over longer periods of time and therefore are more appropriate for assessing the effects of more chronic stressors. In laboratory research mostly blood and salivary measures are used with salivary assessments being far less aversive for study participants. In field settings, predominantly urinary and salivary measures are used. With respect to practical purposes questions of handling and storage need to be considered (Elfering, Grebner, Semmer, Byland, & Gerber, 2003; Kirschbaum & Hellhammer, 1994; Lovallo & Thomas, 2000). Catecholamine levels are known to be affected by various factors such as drugs (i.e., caffeine, alcohol, nicotine), food intake, and specific medication (Lavallo & Thomas, 2000; Lundberg, 1995). In addition, particularly noradrenaline reacts to physical activity (Dienstbier, 1989). Cortisol levels are influenced by a range of different variables such as gender, age, pregnancy and oral contraceptive use, nicotine, or heavy physical exercise (Kirschbaum & Hellhammer, 1994; Lavallo & Thomas, 2000; Lundberg, 1995). Therefore, study protocols need to be designed carefully. Semmer et al. (2004) provide useful information about how to increase study participants’ compliance with the study protocols in field settings.

ENDOCRINOLOGICAL RESPONSES TO ACUTE STRESSORS In this section we summarize empirical research evidence on catecholamine and cortisol responses to acute stressors. With acute stressors we refer to stressors that are present in a specific situation or on a specific day, but that do not continue over longer time intervals. First, we will focus on findings from laboratory research, then we will turn to acute stressors assessed in field studies. Laboratory Research Psychoendocrinological responses to acute stressors have been extensively studied in laboratory settings. Typically, in these studies, participants’

6

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

baseline catecholamine or cortisol levels were assessed first. Then, study participants were exposed to a stressor (e.g., a demanding task) and associated changes in catecholamine or cortisol were recorded. In some studies, two or more types of stressful conditions were compared. Catecholamine Responses Biondi and Picardi (1999) reviewed experimental research on the associations between acute stressors and catecholamine responses. They described experimental contributions on stress and endocrine functioning by differentiating between the following types of stressors: Mental arithmetics, mental arithmetics combined with a speech test, color–word interference tasks, and prolonged laboratory tasks. We will not report every study on laboratory tasks and catecholamine reactions in detail here. Rather, we will give examples of studies on specific laboratory tasks and will add studies that have not been included in the review. Experiments including mental arithmetic tasks generally reveal an increase in catecholamines although the time course of the catecholamine response seems to differ strongly across participants. While all studies mentioned in Biondi and Picardi’s (1999) review found an increase in adrenaline levels in response to mental arithmetics, not all studies revealed an increase in noradrenaline levels. When mental arithmetic tasks were combined with a speech test to produce pronounced psychological stress, results showed elevations in adrenaline as well as noradrenaline. In a more recent study, Matthews, Gump, and Owens (2001) manipulated acute stress through the combination of mental arithmetic tasks and a public speaking task. Measures of plasma catecholamines before, during, and after the task showed a significant increase in adrenaline and noradrenaline during the task. The use of color–word interference tasks overall revealed elevated catecholamine levels in the majority of studies. Biondi and Picardi (1999) concluded that the few exceptions may be explained by methodological limitations of the respective studies. Results also indicated the importance of time of measurement, which means, for example, that in some studies noradrenaline levels were not elevated during the task itself but directly afterwards. Biondi and Picardi (1999) also reviewed studies on prolonged laboratory tasks that lasted one consecutive hour or more. For example, a study including a baseline condition (relaxing in the laboratory) and a choice-reaction task over three successive 20 min periods (Frankenhaeuser, Lundberg, & Forsman, 1980) examined urinary measures of catecholamines before each

Endocrinological Processes

7

session and at the end of the 70 min period. The experimental situation was predictable and controllable which means that participants had the opportunity to modify the stimulus rate every 5 min to reach their optimal work pace. Results revealed a general increase in work pace over time as well as elevations in adrenaline and noradrenaline after the 70 min period. Thus, study participants seemed to use the controllability of the experimental situation to increase effort, which resulted in higher activation (catecholamine levels) and higher work pace. However, a study using a 1 h computer-choice-reaction task (Hyyppa, Aunola, Lathela, O¨ahti, & Marniemi, 1983) where participants had partial control over working pace and possibility to predict performance showed no changes in plasma catecholamines after task completion. In contrast to the study of Frankenhaeuser et al. (1980), here participants did not seem to respond to higher levels of control with higher activation. McCann et al. (1993) compared a 2 h stress session including a color–word interference task and a paced auditory serial addition task to a 2 h control session which included the repetition of words or numbers. While plasma adrenaline increased over the course of each session, significantly higher adrenaline levels were found during the stress session compared to the control session. Several laboratory studies on catecholamine reactions used other stressors or stressor combinations than the ones listed by Biondi and Picardi (1999). For example, a study including periods of inactivity, understimulation (monotonous vigilance test), and overstimulation (color–word interference task and reasoning test) assessed urinary catecholamine levels before and after each experimental and baseline condition (Lundberg & Forsman, 1979). During understimulation, performance decreased and adrenaline levels increased while during overstimulation performance increased in the first section and remained high and stable in the second section together with an increase in adrenaline. During inactivity, adrenaline returned to baseline levels. A similar study compared urinary catecholamine levels in a monotonous vigilance task, to an undemanding task (such as time estimation), to a self-paced reaction time task, to a color–word interference task and to a non-engaging task. A comparison between conditions showed that adrenaline increased significantly in all conditions except the last one. However, noradrenaline increased in the reaction time task only (Lundberg & Frankenhaeuser, 1980). Forsman (1981) measured urinary catecholamines after periods of mental work including tasks demanding rapid information processing and after periods of inactivity including relaxing, reading, or music. Alternating these periods in four consecutive 75 min blocks, the author found that adrenaline

8

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

increased during work periods and dropped back to baseline during inactivity periods. Noradrenaline increased significantly from baseline only during the second period of work so that the variation in noradrenaline over the session was not significant. A study on police officers with a Type A profile (Piercecchi-Marti et al., 1999) examined changes in plasma catecholamines in three different role plays including hostage taking, armed robbery with hostage taking, and a waiting situation before an intervention. Measures of plasma catecholamines showed elevations in adrenaline mainly during the role play; while noradrenaline increased after the role play. In a study focusing on physical stressors (Leppaluoto, Korhonen, & Hassi, 2001), men were exposed to cold air 2 h per day for 11 days. Examination of plasma catecholamine levels showed no change in adrenaline levels after the sessions. However, noradrenaline increased significantly on the first day and then habituated on day 5 and 10. Thus, comparisons between experimental conditions with different facets and levels of demands reveal differences in catecholamine responses. However, while adrenaline was related to nearly all the demands posed in the described experiments, noradrenaline was only associated with some of the experimental demands. Here, further research is necessary to more clearly differentiate between demands that are associated with adrenaline responses and those that are related to changes in noradrenaline. Based on the findings above we assume that an increase in adrenaline reflects a general activation and possibly an increase in effort or engaging activity while noradrenaline changes may be rather related to events or demands that are experienced as stressful or aversive. Cortisol Responses In a recent meta-analysis including a total of 208 laboratory studies, Dickerson and Kemeny (2004) examined cortisol responses to acute stressors. Acute stressors comprised public speaking/verbal interaction tasks (k ¼ 37 studies), cognitive tasks (e.g., Stroop task, mental arithmetic tasks, k ¼ 101 studies), combinations of public speaking and cognitive tasks (k ¼ 48 studies), emotion induction procedures (e.g., watching an emotion-eliciting film, k ¼ 16 studies), and noise exposure tasks (k ¼ 6 studies). A total of 6,153 individuals participated in the 208 studies. On average, about half of the participants were male (57 percent). Participants’ mean age was 30.8 years, ranging from 18.4 to 72.3 years. In 55 percent of the studies, cortisol was assessed through plasma; the remaining studies used salivary measures. Studies using urinary cortisol measures were excluded from the meta-analysis.

Endocrinological Processes

9

Dickerson and Kemeny (2004) found an overall effect size of d ¼ 0.31 (CI ¼ 0.22, 0.40) indicating that acute stressors increased the cortisol response about a third of a standard deviation above a pre-stressor baseline. In subsequent moderator analyses, Dickerson and Kemeny examined whether methodological factors and characteristics of the stressor task had influenced the effect size. With respect to potential methodological moderator variables, the authors found a quadratic effect of timing of cortisol assessment indicating that cortisol measures obtained 21–40 min after the onset of the acute stressor were significantly greater than any earlier or later assessments. This finding suggests that the peak cortisol response can be observed 21–40 min after the onset of the stressor. Daytime of data collection was also a significant moderator of the effect size. Effect sizes were larger in studies conducted in the afternoon than in studies conducted in the morning. This finding can be explained by the diurnal pattern of cortisol with generally high and decreasing levels in the morning and lower and more stable levels in the afternoon. Other methodological factors such as average age of study participants, gender ratio, cortisol sampling method, and use of a health screening procedure were not related to the effect size of the cortisol response. As task characteristics that might impact on the effect size, Dickerson and Kemeny (2004) examined the type of task, length of stressor, and stressor domain. With respect to type of task, the authors found that cognitive tasks, public speaking/verbal interaction tasks, and a combination of public speaking and cognitive tasks elicited significant cortisol responses, whereas emotion induction and noise exposure tasks did not result in an increased cortisol response. The cortisol response in tasks combining public speaking and a cognitive task was about twice as large as in any other type of task. Length of stressor was not related to the effect size. Dickerson and Kemeny (2004) focused on two aspects of stressor domains: social-evaluative threat and uncontrollability. Social-evaluative threat refers to the perception that an aspect of the self is or could be negatively judged by others. In laboratory tasks such a social-evaluative threat can be elicited for example, by video-recording participants’ performance, by the presence of an evaluative audience, or by negative social comparison. Moderator analysis showed that social-evaluative threat was significantly related to the effect sizes of the cortisol response with an effect size of d ¼ 0.67 in studies that used a social-evaluative threat procedure. Within studies that elicited social-evaluative threat, the effect size was larger when an evaluative audience or negative social comparison was present than when performance was recorded on videotape.

10

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

Uncontrollability refers to a situation in which a desirable outcome cannot be achieved or in which a negative consequence cannot be avoided, regardless of one’s specific behavior. Dickerson and Kemeny’s moderator analyses of effect sizes showed that uncontrollability was related to the effect size of the cortisol response. Specifically, effect sizes were larger in uncontrollable situations (d ¼ 0.52) than in more controllable situations (d ¼ 0.16). Moreover, self-evaluative threat and uncontrollability turned out as independent predictors of the cortisol response. Comparisons between specific combinations of task types and stressor domains showed that passive tasks and motivated performance without self-evaluative threat or uncontrollability did not elicit significant cortisol responses. Motivated performance where both self-evaluative threat and uncontrollability were present were associated with the largest effect sizes (d ¼ 0.92). Additional analyses showed that – although the experimental tasks were experienced as stressful by the study participants – tasks associated with self-evaluative threat and uncontrollability were not experienced as more stressful than other tasks. The level of experienced distress was not related to cortisol reponse. Thus, self-evaluative threat and uncontrollability seem to be essential for eliciting significant cortisol responses.

Field Research Additional insight into the effects of acute stressors on catecholamine and cortisol responses can be obtained from field studies that used a withinperson design. Some of these studies examined differences in catecholamine and cortisol responses between working days and non-working days (e.g., weekends). The rationale behind these studies is that working days are assumed to be more stressful and therefore should be associated with higher neuroendocrine responses than non-working days, which are assumed to be less stressful. Other studies compared catecholamine levels during work to levels during rest periods at work or to levels during evenings after work. In addition, there are studies that examined the relationship between specific stressors during working days and neuroendocrine responses. Catecholamine Responses Differences between On-the-Job and Off-the-Job Catecholamine Levels. Studies comparing catecholamine levels on and off the job included non-work periods such as rest periods at work (e.g., Lundberg, Granqvist, Hannson, Magnusson, & Wallin, 1989), evening periods after work (e.g., Johansson &

Endocrinological Processes

11

Aronsson, 1984), or rest days (e.g., Dutton, Smolensky, Leach, Lorimor, & Hsi, 1978). A study including rest periods at work (Lundberg et al., 1989) assessed urinary catecholamine levels in workers at a car engine production assembly line over 2 h for 2 days at work and for 2 h on a third day during relaxation in the lunchroom. Urine samples taken directly after the 2 h periods indicated elevations in adrenaline and noradrenaline during work periods compared to the rest periods at work. These findings were supported in a study on supermarket cashiers (Lundberg et al., 1999). Studies that compared catecholamine excretion during work to levels in the evening after work overall indicated significantly higher adrenaline and noradrenaline levels during work than in the evening. Similar differences were found in studies with female technical and clerical workers at a medical center (James, Schlussel, & Pickering, 1993), with supermarket cashiers (Lundberg et al., 1999), and with nurses (Brown & James, 2000). Research on differences in catecholamine levels between working days and rest days found higher catecholamine excretion during working days. For example, Mulders, Meijman, O’Hanlon, and Mulder (1982) found significant differences between working and non-working days for urinary adrenaline and noradrenaline levels in bus drivers. Similar results were reported in studies including registered nurses (Goldstein, Shapiro, Chicz-DeMet, & Guthrie, 1999), supermarket cashiers (Lundberg et al., 1999), long-distance bus drivers (Raggatt & Morrissey, 1997), garbage collectors (Sluiter, Frings-Dresen, & van der Beek, 2000a), lorry drivers (van der Beek et al., 1995), and in a sample of employees from different occupations (Sluiter et al., 2001). However, examination of catecholamine levels in firemen and paramedics (Dutton et al., 1978) indicated differences in urinary adrenaline but not in noradrenaline between a working and a non-working day. Similarly, Frankhaeuser et al. (1989) examined catecholamines in managers and clerical workers and found higher adrenaline levels on working days. With respect to noradrenaline, there were no differences between working days and rest days at home. In addition, a study with insurance company workers (Johansson & Aronsson, 1984) showed higher levels of urinary adrenaline levels on a working day compared to a rest day for one of two subgroups and higher levels of noradrenaline between a working day and a rest day in both groups. An exception to this rather consistent pattern of findings becomes evident in a longitudinal study on the effects of a new information technology implementation on catecholamine changes (Korunka et al., 1996). Urinary adrenaline and noradrenaline were measured on a working day and a rest

12

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

day 2 months before the implementation, 2–6 months after the start of the process, and 12 months after the implementation. Differences in catecholamine levels were found between the three different phases rather than between working days and rest days. Thus, the intervention at work seemed to have a powerful impact that became visible in individual catecholamine responses assessed on as well as off the job. A recent study with 26 white-collar workers in a Swedish government authority (Lundberg & Lindfors, 2002) used a somewhat different approach than the studies described above. The authors compared catecholamine levels on working days at the office to working days including telework and to rest days. Urinary catecholamines were measured during daytime and in the evening. Results indicated that women showed higher levels of daytime catecholamines during telework and during office work than during the rest day. Men had elevated adrenaline levels during office work compared to the rest day. There were no significant differences in daytime catecholamine levels between office work and telework for both groups, which may indicate that working in the office is not more stressful than working at home. Regarding evening catecholamine levels, the authors found higher adrenaline levels in men after telework than after the rest day or after office work. This last result may be due to longer work hours when doing telework, which then may result in higher strain and catecholamine levels. Overall, findings revealed (with the exception of Korunka et al., 1996) that work periods significantly differ from non-work periods in levels of catecholamine excretion. These differences seem to be independent of the examined time period (i.e., rest at work, rest in the evening, a rest day). Effects of Specific Stressful Events Comparisons between catecholamine levels on versus off the job indicated that neuroendocrine responses seem to be associated with acute workrelated stressors in the field setting. In the next step we examine the relationships between specific stressful events and catecholamine responses. Catecholamine Responses to Public Speaking. Research on associations between public speaking and catecholamine responses indicated significant elevations in adrenaline and noradrenaline related to public speaking such as academic talks in seminars or at a national congress (Biondi & Picardi, 1999). Similar results were reported in a study on bank employees who had to fulfil a public speaking task during participation in a 2-week course (Bassett, Marshall, & Spillane, 1987). Thus, speaking in public seems to be a

Endocrinological Processes

13

specific stressful event that is associated with significant changes in catecholamine excretion. Within-Person Differences over Time. Research on within-person differences over time showed that specific time periods at work and related job demands are associated with changes in catecholamine levels. For example, a study on two junior doctors examined changes in work demands and urinary catecholamine levels over 7 weeks (Hockey, Payne, & Rick, 1996). Results revealed that in one person demands were associated with higher levels of adrenaline whereas in the other person no associations between demands and catecholamines were found. Data from information system professionals showed that the adjusted urinary adrenaline value (i.e., the adrenaline– noradrenaline ratio) was high on days when a new project started, on days before a deadline, on days with a sudden increase in workload, and on days when negotiating the budget (Fujigaki & Mori, 1997). However, no correlation between overwork and adrenaline values was found. Accordingly, a study on full-time high school teachers in Finland found significant lower levels of urinary adrenaline in July compared to October which seems to be due to differences in workload during these times of the year (Ritvanen, Louhevaara, Helin, Halonen, & Hanninen, 2003). Overall, field research on catecholamines so far indicates that specific stressful events at work can be associated with elevated catecholamine levels. However, while findings regarding public speaking seem to give a consistent picture, more research is necessary to understand within-person differences in catecholamine responses and their associations with other acute work-related stressors. Cortisol Responses Similar to studies on catecholamine responses to acute stressors, empirical studies on cortisol responses examined differences in cortisol levels between days on and off the job. We will first summarize findings from this area of research. Subsequently, we will address acute (mostly day-specific) stressors and cortisol responses. Because of the circadian pattern of cortisol with a strong decline of cortisol levels during the course of the day, comparisons between daytime cortisol levels at work and evening levels of cortisol at home do not offer any reliable insight into cortisol responses on versus off the job. Therefore, we do not include such studies here. Differences between On-the-Job and Off-the-Job Cortisol Levels. Most studies that compared cortisol levels on working days and non-working days

14

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

failed to find any significant differences. For example, Pollard, Ungpakorn, Ainsworth Harrison, and Parkes (1996) examined 53 women and 51 men from various occupations with the majority of participants being rather highly educated. The researchers assessed urinary cortisol in the afternoons of a Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday. There were no differences in cortisol secretion between Sunday and the other two days, neither for men nor for women. In another study, Raggatt and Morrissey (1997) compared urinary cortisol levels in 10 male bus drivers on driving and on resting days at 7 a.m., 11 a.m., and 7 p.m. Cortisol levels on driving days did not differ significantly from cortisol levels on rest days. Similar findings were observed in many other studies (Frankenhaeuser et al., 1989; Goldstein et al., 1999; Hanson, Maas, Meijman, & Godaert, 2000; Lundberg & Lindfors, 2002; van Eck & Nicolson, 1994). More recent studies suggest that possible differences in cortisol responses between working and non-working days might not refer to cortisol levels throughout the day, but rather to the cortisol awakening response. In a sample of 196 employed men and women, Kunz-Ebrecht, Kirschbaum, Marmot, and Steptoe (2004a) examined the increase of salivary cortisol after the first 30 min after awakening. On a working day, this increase was more pronounced than on a weekend day. Interestingly, the increase on the working day was particularly strong for women. On the weekend day, women showed no greater increase than men. Also Schlotz, Hellhammer, Schulz, and Stone (2004) observed differences in the increase of cortisol levels between days during the week and the weekend in the first 30 to 45 min upon awakening. These findings might indicate that the morning routine on a working day is more stressful than the morning routine on a weekend day. Alternatively, it might be that cortisol secretion is particularly sensitive to the anticipation of stress. Probably, individuals anticipate more stressors to occur on a working day than on a non-working day. They may expect that the weekend may be characterized by a low degree of stressfulness. However, the actual level of stressors encountered during the weekend – although stressors will stem from a different domain – may not differ much between working and non-working days. As a consequence, cortisol levels assessed later during the day do not differ between working days and weekend days. Effects of Specific Stressful Events Another set of within-person studies investigated the relationship between acute stressors at work and cortisol responses. These studies refer to different time frames ranging from relatively long intervals of several months

Endocrinological Processes

15

(Theorell et al., 1988) to single days (Rose, Jenkins, Hurst, Herds, & Hall, 1982), and to 90 min intervals during a day (van Eck, Berkhof, Nicolson, & Sulon, 1996). In a sample of 50 men from six occupations, Theorell et al. (1988) investigated the fluctuation of job strain and various physiological parameters over the course of 1 year. Specifically, they compared four measurement occasions during the year with varying degrees of job strain. Job strain was operationalized as the ratio of demands and decision latitude. Although systolic blood pressure increased as job strain increased, morning plasma cortisol levels did not differ significantly between the four measurement occasions. Studies conducted at the day-level suggest that stressful days are associated with higher cortisol levels than less stressful days. For example, Rick and Acton (1988) examined self-reported stress and urinary cortisol in twelve cardiothoracic anesthetists over a period of twelve days. On days experienced as stressful, study participants had urinary cortisol levels above their own average. In a study with air-traffic controllers, Rose et al. (1982) tested whether variations in objective indicators of workload (and other work-related variables) within an individual are related to variations in plasma cortisol within this individual. Workload referred to the number of airplanes handled and was observed on-site by a technician. For each air traffic controller who participated in the study, the researchers compared a day characterized by a high cortisol response with a day characterized by a low cortisol response. On high cortisol days, workload was significantly higher than on low cortisol days. Thus, as workload increased, cortisol responses also increased on average. However, two caveats are necessary here. First, large increases in workload were reflected in only modest increases in cortisol response. Second, not all study participants showed increased cortisol responses when confronted with substantial increases in workload. In a subsample, cortisol levels decreased when workload increased. Interestingly, the so-called ‘responders’ (i.e., air-traffic controllers whose cortisol reponses paralleled increases in workload), were described as technically competent by their peers, provided with more work autonomy from supervisors, and reported to be more satisfied with their work than were non-responders. When comparing this result with findings from laboratory research (Dickerson & Kemeny, 2004) it seems strange that cortisol increases in high workload situations associated with high work autonomy (i.e., job control). Rose et al. (1982) offer the interpretation that high responders show engagement also in high workload situations whereas non-responders reduce

16

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

their engagement when workload increases. In line with this interpretation, a cortisol increase on high workload days would constitute an adaptive response, whereas the absence of a cortisol increase would be considered maladaptive (McEwen, 1998; Siegrist, 1998). Alternatively, it might be that in case of high job control, a high workload situation is more relevant for one’s self-esteem because job control offers the opportunity to act and individuals might feel more responsible for achieving desirable outcomes. In case of low job control however, perceived responsibility might decrease (Hackman & Oldham, 1976) and therefore the situation loses its self-threatening potential and cortisol levels remain relatively low. Also Zeier, Brauchli, and Joller-Jemelka (1996) examined cortisol responses in air traffic controllers. The researchers assessed salivary cortisol before and after two morning work sessions, one in February (a month with relatively low objective workload) and one in May (a month with relatively high objective workload). During both sessions, salivary cortisol levels increased – despite the diurnal pattern of cortisol response that is characterized by a decrease of cortisol secretion during the course of the day. Most importantly, increase in cortisol response was more pronounced during the high workload session suggesting an association between objective workload and cortisol response. Taken together, studies that compared single working days with varying degrees of workload suggest that cortisol secretion increases as acute workload increases. However, as the comparison between responders and nonresponders in Rose et al’s. (1982) study suggests, the configuration between specific work situation and person-related variables that lead to an increase in cortisol response seems to be more complex. During the past decade, researchers started to use an experience-sampling approach for investigating the association between stressful events and cortisol responses. Although some of these studies assessed stressors from various domains and did not differentiate between job-related and non-job related stressors, they offer important insights into the relationship between daily stressors and cortisol responses. It is an interesting feature of these studies that they provide measures of momentary affect. Including measures of affect into the analyses may help in explaining why stressors are related to cortisol responses. Using a multi-level modeling approach, van Eck et al. (1996) analyzed salivary cortisol samples collected at 10 times a day during a period of 5 consecutive days. The occurrence of a stressful event was significantly related to an increase in cortisol. In addition, state negative affect and state agitation were also positively related to cortisol levels and turned out as a

Endocrinological Processes

17

mediator between the occurrence of a stressful event and elevated cortisol levels. However, positive affect was not related to cortisol responses. Interestingly, the prior frequency of the stressful event was negatively related to cortisol suggesting that study participants habituated to the specific stressors. Smyth et al. (1998) followed a similar approach and collected six assessments of stressful events and six salivary cortisol samples on 2 days. Analysis showed that the occurrence of a stressful event 25 min prior to cortisol assessment was not related to the subsequent cortisol levels. However, currently experiencing problems and the anticipation of future stressors showed significant relationships to cortisol responses. Both positive and negative affects were associated with cortisol responses, with positive affect showing a negative relationship and negative affect showing a positive relationship. Compared to cortisol responses examined in laboratory settings, cortisol responses to the daily stressors assessed in these field settings were relatively smaller in size. In a more recent study, Hanson et al.(2000) focused on job-related stressors and examined the relationship between stressful events and cortisol in 77 health professionals and office workers. More specifically, following the Effort–Reward Imbalance model (Siegrist, 1996), the researchers assessed the ratio between momentary demands and momentary satisfaction and salivary cortisol at several semi-random intervals throughout the day. Momentary demands referred to interruptions, time pressure, and physical demands. Analyses showed no relationship between the demand–satisfaction ratio and cortisol levels. Momentary negative mood was positively related to cortisol levels. The most consistent finding from these experience-sampling studies is the association between negative affect and cortisol increase. With respect to positive affect, findings are less conclusive. Interestingly, ongoing stressful events were related to increased cortisol responses in two of the studies (van Eck et al., 1996; Smyth et al., 1998), but not in the third one (Hanson et al., 2000). When interpreting the findings from the Hanson et al. study, it has to be taken into account that not a pure stressor measure was used but a demand-satisfaction ratio that might have obscured the effect of stressful demands. Based on the assumption that negative mood mediates the relationship between daily stressors and cortisol responses, one might argue that the demand-satisfaction ratio does not result in negative mood and therefore, cortisol levels do not increase. In addition, it might be that the demands reported in this study were not taxing and novel enough to result in increased cortisol secretion.

18

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

Taken together, these within-person studies on cortisol responses showed that cortisol levels are higher on high workload days than on low workload days. It might be that the elevated cortisol levels are not only a reaction to high workload but may also result from the anticipation that high workload continues. Similarly, when experiencing or anticipating stressful events, cortisol levels tend to be increased. Thus, changes in cortisol response become evident when contrasting specific days (and even shorter time periods) with varying degrees of stressors (Rose et al., 1982; van Eck et al., 1996) but not when analyzing larger time intervals (Theorell et al., 1988). This interpretation suggests that the cortisol responses to acute stressors occur rather quickly and are most pronounced when the stressors are novel. However, because of habituation processes increased cortisol responses are less likely to be observed when stressors last for longer periods of time. The experience-sampling studies suggest that the primary pathway by which daily stressors impact on cortisol may be negative affect. The role of low positive affect is less obvious. These within-person studies in real-world settings mirror findings from laboratory research that showed increased cortisol levels in stressful situations. However, cortisol increases in field studies are less pronounced than in laboratory research. The meta-analysis of Dickerson and Kemeny (2004) indicated that cortisol responses are particularly high when the demanding situations are associated with uncontrollability and high self-evaluative threat. It would be an interesting avenue for future research to examine whether specific situational features such as uncontrollability and self-evaluative threat increase the cortisol response to daily stressors.

ENDOCRINOLOGICAL CORRELATES OF CHRONIC STRESSORS After having examined the neuroendocrinological responses to acute stressors, we now turn to reactions to more chronic stressors. The core question to be discussed is whether chronic work stressors and other work characteristics such as low job control are associated with elevated baseline levels of catecholamines and cortisol. Empirical research addressed this question by examining catecholamines and cortisol levels in different occupations and by testing the relationship between various work characteristics and baseline levels of catecholamines and cortisol. Most of the studies focusing on neuroendocrinological correlates of chronic stressors followed a betweenperson approach to data analysis.

Endocrinological Processes

19

Catecholamines In this section we will examine associations between specific work characteristics and levels of catecholamines. First, we will review empirical research on varying catecholamine responses referring to differences between occupations. Second, we will discuss the role of specific work characteristics such as workload, job control, or social support. Third, we will report relationships between strain reactions as indicators of work stress and catecholamine levels. Differences in Catecholamine Levels Between Occupations and Different Types of Jobs Several studies on neuroendocrine processes compared catecholamine levels between different occupations. Such comparisons are based on the assumption that different occupations are characterized by variations in work conditions such as workload or control. Studies comparing catecholamine levels between employees with similar work tasks, for example, firemen and paramedics (Dutton et al., 1978) or nurses and nurse’s aides (Brown & James, 2000) could not find any significant differences in catecholamine levels between these groups. One might expect that comparisons between occupational groups with greater differences in work characteristics will also show greater differences in catecholamine responses. Several studies reported comparisons between groups of workers with more repetitive work and workers with more control, more responsibility, and greater utilization of skills at work (Frankenhaeuser & Johansson, 1986; Hansen, Kaergaard, Andersen, & Netterstrom, 2003; Johansson, Aronsson, & Lindstrom, 1978; Spillane, 1984). Some of the results revealed higher catecholamine levels in the first group (Frankenhaeuser & Johansson, 1986; Johansson et al., 1978). The lack of differences between the two work groups in the other studies (Hansen et al., 2003; Spillane, 1984) may be explained by greater similarity between the groups than expected. A study on workers in an insurance company (Johansson & Aronsson, 1984) differentiated between employees that spent more than 50 percent of working time at visual display units (DVUs) and employees that worked less than 10 percent of their working time with DVUs (control group). Results regarding levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline indicated general differences in adrenaline levels as well as differences in the time trends for adrenaline levels between both groups. During working days, the DVU group had higher daytime and evening levels of adrenaline than the control group.

20

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

Regarding time trends, the DVU group showed the highest level of adrenaline in the morning; maybe because they tried to get done before a possible breakdown of the technical system. In contrast, the control group showed the highest adrenaline levels in the afternoon; maybe because of a build up of work and things to be done on the same day. No differences in noradrenaline were found between both groups. A study on sawmill workers (Fibiger, Christensen, Singer, & Kaufmann, 1986) which was divided into six job categories according to their work tasks partially found significant differences between job categories regarding adrenaline and the noradrenaline/adrenaline ratio. Sawyers (which included three of the six categories), who have work tasks that are characterized by repetitiveness, high frequency of decision making, restricted range of movements, and time pressure showed higher levels of adrenaline and lower levels of the noradrenaline/adrenaline ratio than the other groups. A comparison between 48 police officers and a control group working in clerical jobs revealed higher levels of noradrenaline in the first group (Ely & Mostardi, 1986). Comparisons between school teachers, part-time teachers, gardeners, and rescue workers (Ritvanen et al., 2003) revealed that rescue workers showed the highest levels of noradrenaline while no significant differences in adrenaline were found. A classification of 60 male workers (Sluiter, FringsDresen, van der Beek, Meijman, & Heisterkamp, 2000b) into individuals doing mainly mental (management, supervisor, foremen), physical–mental (nurses ambulance drivers) or physical tasks (flower transport workers, construction workers, garbage collectors) showed higher adrenaline levels in the mental and the physical group than in the physical–mental group. There were no significant differences in noradrenaline between the groups. Overall, comparisons between various occupations and types of jobs that differ in work tasks or work characteristics reveal differences in catecholamine levels. Non-significant results can mainly be explained by small sample size or overlapping work characteristics in the groups in comparison. However, based on these results, it still remains unclear which specific work characteristics may be able to explain the differences in individual catecholamine levels. Therefore, the following sections will focus on the role of specific work characteristics in catecholamine levels.

Workload Regarding specific work characteristics and their relationship to catecholamine responses most empirical studies examined workload. In these studies,

Endocrinological Processes

21

workload has either been described in more general terms (e.g., Fujiwara et al., 2004) or referred to specific aspects of workload (e.g., Biondi & Picardi, 1999; Evans & Carrere, 1991; Fujigaki & Mori, 1997; Vivoli, Bergomi, Rovesti, Carrozzi, & Vezzosi, 1993). In both approaches, workload was either measured through classical survey methods including self-reports (e.g., Fibiger et al., 1986; Fujiwara et al., 2004; Goldstein et al., 1999; Lundberg et al., 1989; Sluiter, Frings-Dresen, & van der Beek, 2000a), through the use of interviews (e.g., Fujigaki & Mori, 1997; Knox, Theorell, Svensson, & Waller, 1985), through more objective indicators (e.g., Evans & Carrere, 1991; Korunka et al., 1996; Ritvanen et al., 2003; Sluiter et al., 2000a), or through comparisons between work tasks with different levels of job demands (e.g., Hansen et al., 2003). In the following section we will differentiate between findings regarding general workload, specific aspects of workload, and the accumulation of workload. Studies Examining General Workload Several studies on general workload used items based on Karasek’s Job Content Questionnaire (Karasek, 1979). Data on machine operators and process monitoring employees (Hansen et al., 2003) as well as on nurses and nurse’s aides (Brown & James, 2000) did not reveal any relationships between work demands and catecholamines. However, a study including health care providers (Fujiwara et al., 2004) indicated higher levels of noradrenaline in the high demand group but no differences in adrenaline between the high demand and the low demand group. Thus, studies using Karasek’s scale usually indicate no relationships between general workload and catecholamine levels. Studies using other measures of general workload seem to lead to similar conclusions. For example, Harenstam and Theorell (1988) used a self-developed scale where the sum of the items represented the level of work demands. Results from prison staff did not reveal any association between work demands and changes in catecholamines. Similar results were found in data from a mixed occupational sample (Sluiter et al., 2000b) and a study of industrial workers (Schnorpfeil et al., 2003). However, examination of workers at a car engine production assembly line indicated that workers who reported to be pressed by demands and to experience high levels of time pressure showed higher levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline at work than workers with low demands and low time pressure (Lundberg et al., 1989). In another study physical workload was positively associated with adrenaline as well as noradrenaline in garbage collectors (Sluiter et al., 2000a). However, because physical workload was

22

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

operationalized as specific levels of heart rate, this measure may rather be an indicator of physiological reaction than a work stressor. Similarly, in the Lundberg et al. study, workload was operationalized as feelings of being pressed rather than a more incumbent-independent work demand measure. Overall, studies on the relationship between general workload and catecholamine responses cannot unequivocally support the assumption that higher workload generally is related to higher levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline. Thus, chronically high levels of general workload or demands are not necessarily associated with high levels of catecholamines. Studies Examining Specific Aspects of Workload We will now review research on more specific aspects of workload. The following studies operationalized the level of workload as occupation- or task-specific work demands. For example, a differentiation between selfreported mental and physical workload in sawmill workers revealed positive associations between both measures of workload and noradrenaline (Fibiger et al., 1986). In addition, both indicators were negatively related to the noradrenaline/adrenaline ratio. Furthermore, adrenaline was found to be positively related to self-reported mental workload while the noradrenaline/ adrenaline ratio was negatively related to self-reported mental effort (Fibiger & Singer, 1989). A study on bus drivers which used data regarding traffic congestion from archival records (Evans & Carrere, 1991) revealed significant associations between traffic congestions and urinary adrenaline as well as noradrenaline levels. Schaubroeck and Ganster (1993) reported that employees who had more complex relationships with people and less complex relationships with things at work showed lower levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline. Mental demands in the form of aptitude requirements were not significantly related to catecholamine levels. The implementation of a new technology – which probably resulted in increased workload – was found to be associated with adrenaline and noradrenaline levels two months before implementation, a few months after the start of the process, and twelve months after the implementation (Korunka et al., 1996). Thus, structural changes at work that may be associated with changes in workload seem to be related to elevations in catecholamine levels for a longer period of time than just a few days. One may assume that especially such a ‘chronic’ elevation in catecholamine levels may be detrimental for long-term health. A study on physical workload, operationalized as the maximum oxygen uptake during loading and unloading in lorry drivers found no relationships

Endocrinological Processes

23

between workload and adrenaline but between workload and noradrenaline (van der Beek et al., 1995). However, a comparison between a high and a low physical exertion group of Japanese health care providers did not reveal any differences in catecholamines between both groups (Fujiwara et al., 2004). Although research has already indicated that physical exertion seems to be associated with changes in catecholamine levels, the inconclusive findings above may be due to different operationalizations of physical workload. Studies Examining the Accumulation of Workload One reason for non-significant relationships between workload and catecholamine levels could be that workload per se does not necessarily lead to an increase in catecholamine levels. Rather, increased levels of adrenaline or noradrenaline may be indicators of accumulated work demands, that is, high levels of workload experienced over a longer period of time. Data on three long-distance truck drivers indicated that noradrenaline was especially high at the end of the working day when workload had accumulated (Vivoli et al., 1993). Accordingly, a study on the accumulation of workload over time examined 10 tree-planting workers after 19 and after 37 days of planting (Roberts, 2002). At the second measurement occasion, increased levels of plasma noradrenaline were found while accumulation of workload had no effects on adrenaline. A comparison between nurses with work histories of 1 to 13 years and nurses who had 14 to 30 years of work history revealed that nurses with longer work histories showed higher levels of noradrenaline (Goldstein et al., 1999). Thus, findings reveal that the accumulation of workload over shorter (1 day) and longer (years) time periods can be associated with elevated noradrenaline levels. Interestingly, the samples used in the three studies described above can all be characterized by high levels of physical workload. Therefore, results support earlier findings (Mulder, Mulder, Meijman, Veldman, & van Roon, 2000) indicating high noradrenaline levels in response to physical demands.

Job Control We will now review findings on associations between job control and catecholamine responses. Job control can be described as a resource that decreases individual stress reactions. In the studies reviewed below job control has also been described as decision latitude or autonomy and has been either measured by self-reports (e.g., Fujiwara et al., 2004; Johansson et al., 1978;

24

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

Sluiter et al., 2000a) or through categorizations of jobs (e.g., Hansen et al., 2003; Johansson et al., 1978). A study on sawmill workers differentiated between a high risk group with highly repetitive work, high physical constraints, and a machine-regulation of work tasks and a control group with more autonomy at work (Johansson et al., 1978). Comparisons between both groups revealed that little variations in work cycles were associated with higher levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline. In addition, physical constraints were positively related to noradrenaline levels. Furthermore, machine-paced workers showed higher levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline than man-paced workers. Similarly, higher catecholamine levels were found in employees with machine-controlled work compared to employees with manually operated machine work (Spillane, 1984). Research examining job control in bus drivers found that self-reported job control was associated with lower levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline (Evans & Carrere, 1991). In addition, control partially mediated the relationship between workload – operationalized as traffic congestions – and adrenaline and fully mediated the relationship between congestions and noradrenaline. Surprisingly, in their study of garbage collectors, Sluiter et al. (2000a) found – in contrast to the findings above – that higher levels of autonomy were associated with higher levels of adrenaline. Autonomy was not associated with noradrenaline excretion. Unfortunately, the authors do not discuss these findings any further. Maybe autonomy allows garbage collectors to increase their range of tasks or movements, which leads to activation and higher effort that becomes visible in elevated adrenaline levels. Several studies on job control and changes in catecholamine levels did not find any associations between both variables (Brown & James, 2000; Fujiwara et al., 2004; Goldstein et al., 1999; Hansen et al., 2003; Knox et al., 1985; Schnorpfeil et al., 2003; Sluiter et al., 2000b). Thus, findings regarding the relationship between job control and levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline remain inconclusive. Differences in the results between the described studies cannot be explained by sample size or other obvious methodological factors. Here, clearly more research seems necessary to allow further insights into the possible role of job control in catecholamine changes.

Job Strain In his model on job demands and job control, Karasek (1979) proposed that especially the combination of high work demands and low job control is

Endocrinological Processes

25

related to high levels of stress reactions. Based on this model, several studies combined measures of work demands and control into a measure of ‘‘job strain.’’ This resulting strain level was then assumed to be positively associated with catecholamine excretion. For example, Carrere, Evans, Palsane, and Rivas (1991) defined strain as the difference between demands and control. Data from bus drivers revealed that high strain was associated with higher levels of on-the-job adrenaline and noradrenaline levels. However, in another study, psychosocial job strain as the difference between demands and decision latitude was not associated with catecholamine excretion (van der Beek et al., 1995). Evans and Carrere (1991) found a significant interaction of traffic congestion as a measure of workload and self-reported control on adrenaline and noradrenaline. A study using the control/demands ratio as an indicator of strain revealed higher levels of noradrenaline in the high strain group compared to the low strain group, but no difference in adrenaline between both groups (Fujiwara et al., 2004). However, a study using a more specific formula [(job demands/ decision latitude)/2)
10)] to calculate the level of job strain found no association between job strain and catecholamine levels (Goldstein et al., 1999). Thus, similar to findings regarding job control, results on associations between job strain and catecholamine levels are still inconclusive. However, in our opinion, the use of a job strain measure as described in most of the studies above does not seem to be an adequate operationalization with regard to Karasek’s (1979) model. The model rather assumed an interaction effect of demands and control, which would call for a moderated regression analysis approach. The only study that actually tested (and found) such an interaction effect was conducted by Evans and Carrere (1991). Thus, welldesigned and methodologically rigorous studies are needed to give more insight into possible interactions between job demands and job control and their relationships with catecholamine levels.

Social Aspects of the Workplace Most studies that examined the relationship between social aspects at work and catecholamine levels focused on social support. Social support is often viewed as a resource that may play an important role in individual stress reactions (Cohen & Wills, 1985). Although several studies on work stress and catecholamine responses have included measures of social support, the relationship between social support and endocrine reactivity has not been well studied yet (Uchino, Cacioppo, & Kiecolt-Glaser, 1996).

26

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

Knox et al. (1985) found strong associations between high levels of venous adrenaline and low levels of social support operationalized as attachment and number of contacts with acquaintances. However, no associations between psychosocial interactions such as social support at work, conflicts, or relationship with the supervisor and adrenaline or noradrenaline were found. A study on prison staff in Sweden (Harenstam & Theorell, 1988) measured urinary catecholamines as well as self-reports of work characteristics including psychosocial climate. Data indicated that employees who experienced their psychosocial climate at work as more positive showed lower levels of adrenaline. Accordingly, a study on machine operators indicated that persons low in self-reported social support (measured by Karasek & Theorell’s (1990) scale) showed higher levels in adrenaline than persons high in social support. Again, no associations with noradrenaline were found (Hansen et al., 2003). Surprisingly, the study of Fujiwara et al. (2004) on health care providers revealed positive associations between supervisory support and adrenaline while no associations with noradrenaline levels were found. In addition, no differences in adrenaline or noradrenaline levels between groups with high versus low co-worker support appeared. Several other studies did not find any significant associations between indicators of social support and catecholamine levels (Cobb, 1974; Evans & Carrere, 1991; Schnorpfeil et al., 2003). These overall inconclusive findings may indicate that social support is not directly associated with catecholamine excretion but rather acts as a moderator in the stress process. In addition, different sources of social support may play a role at different occasions. For example, social support from supervisors and colleagues may play a role in catecholamine excretion during work while support from friends and family may rather be important during off-work time. Furthermore, the inconsistency in results may be due to different operationalizations of social aspects at work. Therefore, more research seems necessary to better understand the role of different sources of social support in the stress process and related catecholamine responses.

Other Job Characteristics In the following section we will review studies including work characteristics other than workload, job control, or social aspects. However, because there is not much research on these job characteristics and their relationships

Endocrinological Processes

27

with catecholamine responses yet, it seems too early to draw any final conclusions. Job Insecurity In his study with participants from different occupations, Knox et al. (1985) did not find any associations between job security and venous catecholamine levels. Monotonous Work Findings regarding relationships between monotonous work and catecholamine levels have already been described above indicating that little variations in work cycles as well as high task repetitiveness were associated with higher levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline. Data from Johansson et al. (1978) additionally revealed that the duration of a work cycle was positively related to the level of adrenaline but not to the level of noradrenaline. Physical Stressors Examination of the role of heat exposure in workers from a glass manufacturing company indicated that operators in the long-term heat exposure group showed higher catecholamine excretion throughout the work shift than operators in a control group from the same company (Vangelova, Deyanov, Velkova, Ivanova, & Stanchev, 2002). In addition, results from workers in a thermoelectric power plant revealed that reduced catecholamine excretion in the second half of a night shift was more pronounced in workers under heat exposure than in workers of a control group (Vangelova & Deyanov, 2000). Shiftwork A study on city police officers compared levels of catecholamines in rotating shift workers to those of day shift or night shift workers (Ely & Mostardi, 1986). Results revealed higher levels of noradrenaline in workers under a rotating shift system. Skill Discretion We located two studies that explicitly examined associations between skill discretion and catecholamine levels. The study of Knox et al. (1985) indicated that little possibility for learning new things was associated with higher levels of adrenaline but was not related to noradrenaline. In their study on prison staff, Harenstam and Theorell (1988) found that skill discretion was negatively related to noradrenaline levels at night after a workday and to daytime adrenaline during workdays.

28

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

Unemployment Cobb (1974) examined the relationship between job loss and catecholamine changes in male workers 6 weeks before the closing of a company, 6 weeks after the closing, 6 months after the closing, and 12 and 24 months after the closing. Results indicated that noradrenaline levels in a group of terminees were significantly elevated at all measurement occasions – except 24 months after the closing – compared to a control group. However, when controlling for coffee consumption within 3 h before the measurement, terminees’ levels of noradrenaline differed from the control group only at 6 and 12 months after the closing of the company. Accordingly, a study comparing 10 employed to 30 unemployed persons (Fleming, Baum, Reddy, & Gatchel, 1984) found that unemployed individuals showed higher levels of adrenaline as well as noradrenaline.

Strain Reactions as Indicators of Work Stress Some studies that examined relationships between work stress and catecholamines included subjective strain reactions as indicators of work stress. Measures mostly referred to self-reports of individual well-being and included variables such as need for recovery (Sluiter et al., 2001), fatigue (Lundberg et al., 1989; Korunka et al., 1996), and job (dis-)satisfaction (e.g., Hansen et al., 2003). Need for Recovery and Fatigue A study measuring adrenaline levels during work, after work, and during 2 days off did not find any relationships with self-reported need for recovery (Sluiter et al., 2001). Accordingly, Lundberg et al. (1989) found that relationships between feelings of tiredness, irritation, or tension and catecholamines were generally low and non-significant. However, a longitudinal study on the effects of the implementation of a new technology (Korunka et al., 1996) showed that changes in adrenaline and noradrenaline were significantly related to changes in self-reported fatigue. Job (Dis-)Satisfaction In their study on sewing machine operators, Hansen et al. (2003) found that persons who were less satisfied with their jobs showed higher levels of adrenaline. Accordingly, in the longitudinal study on the implementation of a new technology (Korunka et al., 1996), changes in catecholamines were significantly associated with job dissatisfaction.

Endocrinological Processes

29

Thus, although findings still seem inconsistent self-reported strain reactions may be associated with adrenaline and noradrenaline excretion. If these reactions are interpreted as indicators of work stress we find that higher levels of stress are related to higher levels of catecholamines. Clearly, more research is necessary in this area to allow further conclusions on the importance of self-reported strain reactions in catecholamine excretion. Cortisol In this section, we will review empirical research on the relationship between chronic work stressors and cortisol responses. We will summarize research on differences in cortisol levels between occupations of varying degrees of work stressors and will describe the associations between specific work characteristics such as workload, job control, and social aspects of the workplace on the one hand and cortisol levels on the other. When examining the relationship between work characteristics and cortisol, it is not only interesting to analyze whether work characteristics are associated with average cortisol levels, but also whether they are related to specific diurnal patterns of cortisol responses. Differences in Cortisol Levels between Occupations and Different Types of Jobs Several studies compared baseline cortisol levels between different occupations. For example, Theorell et al. (1990) examined morning plasma cortisol in 150 men from six different occupations (freight handlers, aircraft mechanics, air traffic controllers, physicians, waiters, and musicians employed by a symphony orchestra). Analyses showed that age-corrected mean cortisol levels were the lowest for waiters and the highest for physicians. High cortisol levels in physicians are in line with findings from research by Payne, Rick, and their co-workers who reported substantially elevated cortisol levels in cardiothoracic surgeons and cardiothoracic anesthetists compared to the normal population (Payne, Rick, Smith, & Cooper, 1984; Rick & Acton, 1988). In their study on neuroendocrinological differences in workers with mental demands (managers and supervisors), physical demands (flower transport workers, construction workers, and garbage collectors) and a mixture of mental and physical demands (male nurses and ambulance workers), Sluiter et al. (2000b) found that employees with mental or physical demands had higher urinary cortisol levels than employees with a mixture of mental

30

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

and physical demands. Interestingly, these relationships between types of jobs and cortisol were found when controlling for a range of other variables including age, job demands, and job control. Other studies concentrated on larger job categories and compared employees from various socioeconomic status groups. In a large-scale study, it was found that employees from higher status groups showed elevated salivary cortisol levels, particularly among women and during the morning (Brandsta¨dter, Baltes-Go¨tz, Kirschbaum, & Hellhammer, 1991). A more complex picture emerged from another study with middle-aged men and women (Steptoe et al., 2003). The study showed that male employees from a low-status group (clerical and office support workers) had higher cortisol levels over the working day than men from the high-status group (administrative employees and professionals). In women, an opposite picture was found. Women in the high-status group had higher cortisol levels. The differences between low- and high-status groups remained significant both in men and women when controlling for stressfulness of the working day. It might be that other work characteristics or family responsibilities explain the gender
status interaction found in this study. Taken together, the picture on occupation-related differences in cortisol levels remains inconclusive. For physicians, elevated cortisol levels have been frequently observed. However, for other occupations, the pattern is less clear. This might be partially due to the relatively broad occupational categories used in the various studies. In addition, more complex interactions with other variables might play a role.

Workload Similar to research efforts on the relationship between job stressors and catecholamine levels, most empirical field studies on cortisol responses focused on workload. A number of studies investigated the relationship between workload encountered at the workplace and employees’ average cortisol level. In some of these studies, cortisol responses were assessed once; in other studies cortisol was assessed at several occasions during the working day and subsequently averaged. In general, there is only very limited evidence that individuals working under high workload show increased cortisol responses throughout the working day (e.g., Fujiwara et al., 2004; Steptoe et al., 1998). Among the studies that did find a significant relationship between workload and cortisol is that of Lundberg et al. (1989) on male assembly line

Endocrinological Processes

31

workers. Self-reported time pressure and feeling pressed by demands was associated with urinary cortisol levels assessed during the working day with correlations ranging between r ¼ 0.31 and r ¼ 0.55. However, on a rest day spent at the company site, time pressure and feelings of pressure were not correlated with urinary cortisol during the day. This finding suggests that workload is not generally related to high levels of cortisol excretion, but only to cortisol excretion during work. In contrast to this study, other studies failed to find differences in cortisol responses throughout the working day between high- and low-workload situations. For example, in their large-scale study with 201 male air traffic controllers, Rose et al. (1982) examined the relationship between workload and average plasma cortisol levels assessed over multiple measurement occasions. In the between-person analysis, workload was not significantly related to an air traffic controller’s average cortisol response. In a sample of male and female retail workers, Steptoe et al. (1998) studied the relationship between workload (operationalized as the number of hours worked) and salivary cortisol levels. Workload was not related to cortisol. Netterstrøm and Hensen (2000) investigated physiological stress indicators in 40 Danish bus drivers. These researchers did not find significant differences in urinary cortisol between bus drivers with high as opposed to low demands. Also in a sample of 16 Japanese female health care providers, salivary cortisol collected at multiple times during a day shift, a night shift, and during a day off did not differ between employees with high versus low job demands (Fujiwara et al., 2004). A study that assessed the effort–reward imbalance as an indicator of demands (Siegrist, 1996) failed to find a significant association between demands and cortisol (Hanson et al., 2000). Interestingly, Sluiter et al. (2000b) reported even lower urinary cortisol levels in employees with high job demands. Taken together, one can conclude that in most studies, average cortisol levels assessed during the working day did not differ between individuals in high versus low workload situations (see Lundberg et al., 1989 for an exception). This finding seems not to be attributable to the small sample sizes of some of the studies. Also in the study of Rose et al. (1982) that comprised more than 200 persons, no differences were found. The pattern of findings is also rather consistent across the various methods of collecting cortisol samples (plasma, saliva, urine) and various workload measures including both self-report and more objective data. However, the Lundberg et al. (1989) study and research that addressed interaction effects suggest that there might be specific work situations in which workload is related to elevated cortisol levels. For example, in a

32

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

sample of 227 employed men and women, aged 45–58 years, Kunz-Ebrecht, Kirschbaum, and Steptoe (2004) found that job demands were positively related to mean salivary cortisol levels over the working day, but only in women with low status jobs; for women in high status jobs and for men, no relationship between job demands and mean cortisol levels was found. Fox and Dwyer (1995) examined the interaction effect between workload and self-monitoring in registered nurses (cf. also Fox, Dwyer, & Ganster, 1993). Quantitative workload and patient load was positively related to work cortisol levels in high self-monitoring nurses, but not in low self-monitoring nurses. It might be that high workload and high patient load are associated with a higher degree of self-evaluative threat in high self-monitoring individuals. As a consequence, cortisol levels increase in this group (cf. Dickerson & Kemeny, 2004). Also job control might play an important role as a moderator in the relationship between demands and cortisol responses. We will review findings on job control later in this chapter. Researchers in the domain of psychoendocrinology have argued that stress reactions are particularly reflected in morning cortisol levels and in the diurnal pattern of cortisol levels rather than in average cortisol levels assessed throughout the day. With respect to morning cortisol levels, it has been found that chronically stressed individuals show a more pronounced increase of cortisol response during the 30 min after awakening (Pruessner, Hellhammer, & Pruessner, 2003; Schulz, Kirschbaum, Pru¨Xner, & Hellhammer, 1998; Wu¨st, Federonko, Hellhammer, & Kirschbaum, 2000). Findings from studies that examined chronic workload point to a similar direction. For example, Lundberg and Hellstro¨m (2002) investigated the relationship between workload and morning cortisol levels in more than 200 women working full-time. As an indicator of workload, Lundberg and Hellstro¨m assessed hours of overtime. Salivary morning cortisol was assessed at 15-min intervals during the first 45 min after awakening on a day off work. Analyses revealed positive relationships between hours of overtime and morning cortisol with correlations ranging between r ¼ 0.29 (15 min after awakening) and r ¼ 0.38 (45 min after awakening). Women who worked more than 10 h overtime per week had significantly higher cortisol levels on the morning of a free day than women working no overtime or moderate overtime (i.e., less than 10 h per week). It is an interesting feature of Lundberg and Hellstro¨m’s study that morning cortisol levels in women working excessive overtime were also elevated on days on which they did not work. It might be that because of the high amount of overtime they anticipated additional housework duties to be accomplished during the day off the job. Results remain somewhat inconclusive because women

Endocrinological Processes

33

working excessive overtime also reported greater responsibility for childcare than women working less or no overtime. Other researchers specifically examined the increase – as opposed to absolute levels – of the cortisol response after awakening. As predicted, Schlotz et al. (2004) found that the increase of cortisol during the first 30 min after awakening was particularly high in high work overload individuals. Kunz-Ebrecht et al. (2004a) reported a similar finding, however, only for study participants with low status jobs. The cortisol awakening response was significantly higher in low status employees with high job demands than in low status employees with low job demands. In high status employees, there was no association between job demands and the cortisol awakening response. This finding suggests that the combination between high job demands and low status might be associated with changed morning cortisol patterns. It has to be noted that at least one study resulted in a finding that seems to contradict elevated morning cortisol levels in individuals facing high workload. In a sample of 70 mothers of 2-year-old children, Adam and Gunnar (2001) found a negative relationship between the number of hours worked outside the home and morning cortisol levels. However, in this study, cortisol was assessed immediately upon awakening, a second measurement point in the early morning was missing. Therefore, the cortisol awakening response cannot be tested with these data. To sum up, there is some – although not yet very broad – empirical evidence that high workload is associated with a more pronounced cortisol awakening response – a reaction that is typical for highly stressed individuals (Pruessner et al., 2003; Schulz et al., 1998; Wu¨st et al., 2000). With respect to the relationship between workload and the overall diurnal pattern of cortisol, research evidence is still rare. Based on a classical study with 200 male white-collar NASA employees, Caplan, Cobb, and French (1979) suggested that high workload may disrupt the circadian rhythm of cortisol. In the low workload group, the researchers found the typical negative relationship between time of day and cortisol level, that is, cortisol secretion decreased over the course of the day. In the medium and high workload groups, however, the relationships were non-significant. It has to be noted that Caplan et al. did not analyze the time-dependent variation of cortisol within persons, but conducted time-related analyses on the basis of the cortisol collection times that differed between the study participants. Therefore, the conclusion, that workload results in a flattening of the cortisol curve might be premature (cf. also Steptoe, Cropley, Griffith, & Kirschbaum, 2000).

34

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

Job Control With respect to job control there is some – although not unequivocal – evidence that low levels of job control are associated with elevated cortisol levels and specific cortisol response patterns. For example, Kunz-Ebrecht et al. (2004b) found that male employees with low job control had higher cortisol levels throughout the working day than men experiencing higher job control. No such difference was found for women. Interestingly, also Ha¨renstam and Theorell (1990) reported an association between low decision latitude (i.e., job control) and elevated cortisol levels in men, but not in women. Steptoe et al. (2000) examined the diurnal pattern of the cortisol response and found a more pronounced decline in salivary cortisol throughout the day in schoolteachers with low job control compared to teachers reporting higher levels of job control. However, there are also studies that did not find any significant association between low job control and cortisol responses (e.g., Netterstom & Hansen, 2000; Schnorpfeil et al., 2003).

Job Strain In line with the job demand–job control model (Karasek, 1979), a number of studies examined the joint effects of workload and job control (i.e., job strain) on cortisol levels. When looking at empirical studies that addressed the association between job strain and cortisol reactions, the operationalization of job strain seems to be crucial. Studies that operationalized job strain as the difference between job demands and job control (Luecken et al., 1997; Ohlson, So¨derfeld, So¨derfeld, Jones, & Theorell, 2001) failed to find any relationship between job strain and cortisol levels. Studies that measured job strain as the ratio of job demands and job control even reported lower cortisol levels in high strain individuals (Fujiwara et al., 2004; Steptoe et al., 1998). A study, however, that used a moderated regression analysis approach found support for the assumption that high job strain is associated with elevated cortisol levels. In a sample of 136 registered nurses, Fox et al. (1993) examined the interaction effect between workload and job control on salivary cortisol collected on two working days. Hierarchical regression analyses showed an interaction effect between quantitative workload and job control on work cortisol measures. More specifically, quantitative workload was not related to work cortisol levels in nurses experiencing a

Endocrinological Processes

35

high level of job control. However, in nurses perceiving a low level of job control, work cortisol levels increased as workload increased. Given that the moderated regression approach is most appropriate for testing the job demand–job control model (De Lange et al., 2003; Wall, Jackson, Mullarkey, & Parker, 1996), this finding is noteworthy and speaks for a buffering role of job control. It converges also with the findings from the Lundberg et al. (1989) study which reported a positive relationship between time pressure and cortisol response in assembly line workers, that is, high-strain workers experiencing low job control and low skill discretion. Thus, when job control is low, job demands are positively related to average cortisol levels during the working day implying that high job control buffers the effects of workload on cortisol secretion. This pattern of findings parallels research evidence from laboratory studies on acute stressors (Dickerson & Kemeny, 2004).

Social Aspects of the Workplace Most studies that addressed social support failed to find a significant association between this work characteristic and cortisol responses (Ha¨renstam & Theorell, 1990; Netterstom & Hansen, 2000). An exception is the study by Schnorpfeil et al. (2003) which assessed work characteristics and a range of physiological measures in a sample of more than 300 industrial workers in Germany. Participants experiencing low social support at work had higher overnight urinary cortisol levels than participants experiencing higher social support, even when controlling for job demands, decision latitude, age, and gender. Some studies addressed other aspects of the social work environment, including leadership behavior. For example, Ha¨renstam and Theorell (1990) examined the association between a broad range of working conditions and morning plasma cortisol in 2,000 prison employees. The researchers conducted aggregated analyses at the prison level and compared prisons with poor working conditions to prisons with more favorable working conditions. Analyses showed that in prisons with a more favorable management style average cortisol levels were lower in female employees. In addition, in prisons with a better psychological climate average cortisol levels were lower in male employees. In their study on 40 Danish bus drivers, Netterstrøm and Hansen (2000) examined differences in urinary cortisol levels in drivers with poor as opposed to more favorable working conditions. Analysis showed that bus

36

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

drivers who felt that ‘‘human leadership’’ was important for management (for example by valuing employees, taking personal considerations, and giving priority to well-being in the workplace) had lower cortisol levels than bus drivers perceiving low levels of human leadership. Taken together, it seems that social aspects of the work situation play a role with respect to cortisol secretion. The finding that unfavorable social situations at work are associated with higher cortisol levels mirror to a certain degree findings from laboratory research. Dickerson and Kemeny (2004) have argued that particularly stressful situations associated with self-evaluative threat (and low control) trigger high cortisol responses. An unfavorable social situation at work might also imply a threat to one’s self-esteem, which will make cortisol secretion more likely. It seems that leadership style and psychosocial climate are more important for reassuring self-esteem than is social support. Inappropriate social support might even undermine an individual’s self-esteem.

Other Work Characteristics Besides workload, job control, and social aspects of the work situation, other work situation variables have also been examined in their relationship to cortisol. These work situation variables include a broad range of specific work features such as repetitive work, shiftwork, expatriate assignments as well as more general indicators of stressful work. In general, mixed findings resulted from studies that focused on specific single stressors. Monotonous and Repetitive Work Hansen, Kaergaard, Anderson, and Netterstrom (2003) investigated the association between repetitiveness of work and urinary cortisol in a sample of 96 female sewing machine operators and 46 female employees performing process monitoring. Repetitiveness of work was rated by ergonomists. Analyses revealed no differences in cortisol levels between women in repetitive as opposed to non-repetitive jobs. Shiftwork Shiftwort has been shown to affect the regulation of the HPA axis. For example, Hennig, Kieferdorg, Moritz, Huwe, and Netter (1998) studied shift-working nurses and found that circadian patterns of cortisol secretion changed after the fourth night shift. In a more recent study, Axelsson, Akerstedt, Kecklund, Lindqvist, and Attefors (2003) examined morning

Endocrinological Processes

37

cortisol of 52 male shift workers at the beginning and at the end of a 35-day shift cycle with a very rapidly rotating shift schedule. Analyses showed that morning cortisol levels decreased during the shift which might indicate a downward regulation of the HPA axis – a phenomenon frequently observed in case of sustained stress (Yehuda, Resnick, Kahana, & Giller, 1993). Expatriate Assignments Anderze´n and Arnetz (1999) investigated expatriate assignment as a potential stressor and examined endocrinological responses in Swedish expatriates and a control-group of non-moving employees. Longitudinal analysis showed that expatriate assignments can be regarded as a stressful experience because job demands changed and feedback from supervisors decreased during expatriates’ time abroad, but not in control group employees. However, serum cortisol levels (blood drawn between 8 and 10 a.m.) did not differ between expatriates and control groups employees and did not change over time. Thus, expatriate assignment did not result in increased cortisol levels measured after 1 and after 2 years abroad. General Indicators of Stressful Work Some studies used rather general indicators of stressful work or summarized various types of stressful events at work into one index. For example, in their study sampling 136 registered nurses, Fox and Dwyer (1995) found no significant relationship between frequency of stressful events encountered at work and salivary cortisol levels. Toivanen et al.(1996) examined morning plasma cortisol in female bank employees, home helpers, and hospital cleaners. The researchers reported no clear pattern of relationships between perceived work stress variables and cortisol levels. In another study, Kurina, Schneider, and Waite (2004) examined salivary cortisol levels and diurnal patterns of cortisol secretion in working parents. Work stress was assessed with a one-item survey measure (‘‘How often do you find your work stressful’’) and with experience-sampling data on feelings of stress at work. Analyses showed that the survey stress measure was negatively related to the average cortisol level in women, but not in men. However, given the large number of analyses performed and the small number of significant findings reported in this study, a substantial interpretation of this negative relationship might be premature. Job Insecurity and Unemployment A specific stressor in the work context is unemployment. In a study with more than 300 blue-collar workers, researchers examined cortisol levels in

38

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

the anticipatory stage and early phase of unemployment and found that (subsequently) unemployed individuals had higher serum cortisol levels than employed workers (Arnetz et al., 1991). Ockenfels, Porter, and Smyth (1995) compared salivary cortisol in 60 employed and 60 unemployed men and women. There was no difference in the overall cortisol levels between employed and unemployed study participants. However, the researchers observed differences in the diurnal patterns of cortisol secretion: unemployed participants showed a tendency toward elevated cortisol levels in the morning and significantly lower cortisol levels in the evening. These differences may be explained by location (i.e., being at home versus being at the workplace) and activity patterns. To sum up, results from studies that addressed a broad range of other potentially harmful work characteristics showed only very few and inconsistent associations between workplace characteristics and cortisol levels. This finding suggests that the presence of aversive and stressful working conditions does not seem to be sufficient for long-lasting changes in cortisol levels. It rather seems that the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis adjusts to the work characteristics and stressors that an individual faces on a regular basis.

Strain Reactions as Indicators of Work Stress When it comes to the relationship between job-related strain reactions and cortisol secretion, there is some – although not unequivocal evidence – that psychological strain reactions are associated with higher cortisol levels. In their study on male assembly line workers, Lundberg et al. (1989) correlated strain measures assessed at work with urinary cortisol responses. Analyses showed that feelings of tiredness and irritation (but not tension) were positively related with cortisol. Anderze´n and Arnetz (1999) found a significant correlation between the General Health Questionnaire score and cortisol in a sample of Swedish expatriates and a matched non-moving response group indicating that employees experiencing poorer health showed higher levels of cortisol. Melamed et al.(1999) examined the association between burnout and salivary cortisol in a mostly male sample of 111 full-time employees in a heavy machinery work context. Employees with high chronic burnout scores had significantly higher cortisol levels than employees with low burnout scores, both in the morning and in the evening. Grossi, Perski, Evengard, Blomkvist, and Orth-Gome´r (2003) conducted a study with a female sample and found no difference in blood cortisol levels between the low and the high burnout group.

Endocrinological Processes

39

Another study that did not find any significant relationship between psychological strain reactions and cortisol was conducted by Burton, Hinton, Neilson, and Beastall (1996). These researchers analyzed the association between various strain measures (e.g., fatigue, psychosomatic symptoms), coping, and salivary cortisol in 115 employees from a computer electronics manufacturing company. No significant relationships were found between strain and coping measures on the one hand and cortisol measured between 10.30 a.m. and 3.00 p.m. on the other. However, the time of cortisol measurement might have obscured any existing relationship. Steptoe, Siegrist, Kirschbaum, and Marmot (2004) examined a specific strain reaction, namely overcommitment, in its relationship to cortisol secretion during a working day. Overcommitment was assessed with selfreport items such as ‘‘As soon as I get up in the morning, I start thinking about work problems’’ and ‘‘People close to me say I sacrifice myself too much for my job.’’ Analyses revealed that overcommitment was positively related to the awakening cortisol response in men, but not in women. In addition, overcommitted men had higher cortisol levels throughout the working day than men with lower overcommitment scores. No such difference was observed in women. The difference between the two overcommitment groups could not be explained by sleep disturbances or job control. These findings suggest that preoccupation with one’s job (also during nonjob time) is related to an increased cortisol secretion in men. The failure to find such an effect in women may be due to different role expectations of men and women. Experience sampling studies suggest that particularly momentary strain reactions are closely related to elevated cortisol responses. For example, Hanson et al. (2000) found that momentary negative mood, but not trait negative affect was positively related to salivary cortisol levels. In another study, momentary negative affect and agitation, but not momentary positive affect were related to cortisol levels (Van Eck et al., 1996). Smyth et al. (1998) reported that both momentary negative and positive affect were related to salivary cortisol levels. Thus, while there is evidence that momentary negative affect seems to play a role in eliciting cortisol reactions, the relevance of momentary positive affect is much less clear.

RESPONSIVITY TO ACUTE STRESSORS Chronic work stressors may not only have an effect on baseline levels of neuroendocrine parameters, particularly catecholamines, but may also

40

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

influence the response patterns to acute stressors and challenging situations. Specifically, it has been suggested that individuals who face chronic, uncontrollable demands show reduced catecholamine and cardiovascular responsivity and enhanced cortisol responsivity (Dienstbier, 1989; Schaubroeck & Ganster, 1993). Schaubroeck and Ganster examined catecholamine and cardiovascular responsivity to challenging situations in a sample of 390 full-time blue- and white-collar employees (93 percent were male). As chronic demands, the researchers assessed mental and interpersonal demands by using classifications of the Dictionary of Occupational Titles. Cardiovascular reactivity was assessed in the laboratory before and during two challenging task situations. Urinary adrenaline and noradrenaline levels were assessed twice on a normal working day (at the beginning of the work shift and 4 h later). As predicted, chronic mental and interpersonal demands were negatively related to cardiovascular reactivity in the laboratory situation. While chronic mental and interpersonal demands were associated with a larger decrease in adrenaline, interpersonal demands were also related to reduced noradrenaline responsivity. The findings concerning cardiovascular reactivity are in line with the authors’ assumptions. Also the findings concerning catecholamine responses may indicate a reduced responsivity to ongoing acute stressors encountered at work. However, because acute stressors were not assessed during the normal working day, this interpretation should be considered as preliminary. Klein (1995, cited in Siegrist, 1998) examined catecholamine and cortisol responses in 68 middle managers who were exposed to a stressful laboratory task. Managers differed in the level of chronic job stress. Managers experiencing high chronic job stress showed a less pronounced response to the laboratory task than managers experiencing low chronic job stress. The study by Matthews et al. (2001) offers additional insight into responsivity patterns to acute stressors. These authors investigated endocrinological responses to acute stressors in 62 individuals reporting high versus low chronic stress. Acute stressors included a mental arithmetic and a publicspeaking task. Blood samples were drawn during an initial rest period (baseline), at the start of the public-speaking task, and three times during recovery (15, 30, and 60 min after the end of the public-speaking task). Analyses showed that high chronic stress levels – although not necessarily work-related – were associated with marginally lower noradrenaline responses to acute stressors. With respect to adrenaline, an interaction effect was found: High chronic stress levels showed a negative relationship with adrenaline responses to acute task stressors in men, but not in women. In addition, high chronic stress levels were associated with significantly lower cortisol levels 15 (and 60) min after the

Endocrinological Processes

41

stressful task. Additional analyses with respect to work-related stress showed that high chronic work stress was associated with low adrenaline responses to acute stressors in men. For women, however, the relationship was positive. In all these analyses, the catecholamine and cortisol response levels were adjusted for their respective baseline levels. Compared to studies that used cardiovascular parameters (Gump & Matthews, 1999), research evidence on the effects of chronic stressors on neuroendocrine responsivity to acute work-related stressors is still limited. Existing studies, however, suggest that men who face chronic demands respond with lower catecholamine (particularly adrenaline) and cortisol levels to acute laboratory stressors. Given that adrenaline and cortisol secretion to acute stressors constitutes an adequate and adaptive response, these studies suggest that men facing chronic demands and experiencing high chronic stress do not respond adequately to acute stressors. As a consequence, acute stressors cannot be adequately dealt with. In this area, clearly more research is needed. It seems warranted that researchers also pay more attention to gender-specific response patterns.

RECOVERY Recovery is an important aspect within physiological research on stress. Recovery refers to the degree to which physiological indicators remain elevated after the stressor has ended (Dickerson & Kemeny, 2004; Haynes, Gannon, Orimoto, O’Brien, & Brandt, 1991; Linden, Earle, Gerin, & Christenfeld, 1997). It has been argued that slow recovery from stress responses may be particularly detrimental for an individual’s health (Frankenhaeuser, 1981; Linden et al., 1997; McEwen, 1998). In contrast, it is assumed that rapid recovery after the end of a stressful period refers to an adaptive pattern that helps to economically use one’s resources and not mobilize resources that are no longer needed (Johansson & Frankenhaeuser, 1973). It seems that both stable individual characteristics (e.g., low neuroticism) and more transient states (low tiredness, relaxation) help in returning quickly to adrenaline baseline levels. In this section, we review findings from both laboratory and field research. Laboratory Research on Catecholamine and Cortisol Recovery Linden et al. (1997) reported that in many laboratory situations recovery was completed some minutes after the termination of the stressors but could

42

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

take considerably longer time in specific situations, for example, when experimental tasks provoked anger. Also Sluiter et al. (2000a) summarized research on recovery and reported that studies examining recovery after mental tasks showed that noradrenaline recovery was complete within 1 h after task performance, but adrenaline levels often remained elevated. It seems that prolonged elevated levels of adrenaline can be particularly observed in studies using urinary measures of catecholamine secretion because it takes some time until reduced catecholamine secretion becomes evident in the respective urinary levels. Studies from Swedish researchers provide more detailed insight into catecholamine recovery after exposure to stressors. For example, Johansson and Frankenhaeuser (1973) examined recovery of adrenaline and noradrenaline excretion after a complex choice reaction task performed under time pressure. Urinary adrenaline returned to baseline levels 60–120 min after the end of the stressor. For noradrenaline the findings were less pronounced. A similar pattern of finding was reported in a study by Johansson (1976). Lundberg, Melin, Evans, and Holmberg (1993) compared urinary catecholamine and cortisol recovery between two different types of tasks performed at computer terminals. One task was a self-paced learning task that provided feedback to the study participants. The other task was a data-entry task providing no feedback. Analyses showed that the amount of deactivation after task completion was smaller in the data-entry group. This finding – although reaching significance for adrenaline only – suggests that after a more stressful task (i.e., data entry) catecholamine and cortisol levels stay more elevated than after a less stressful task that provides learning opportunities and feedback. In addition, in some of the studies, large interindividual differences in speed of adrenaline recovery were observed. Johansson and Frankenhaeuser (1973) reported that rapid decreasers showed higher baseline levels of adrenaline, better performance, and lower neuroticism levels. Using a within-person design, Johansson (1976) examined correlates of adrenaline decrease in participants with unstable patterns of adrenaline recovery. She found that on occasions with rapid adrenaline decrease, participants felt less tired, more relaxed, more alert, and happier. In a study on Tai Chi and other relaxation techniques, Jin (1992) examined whether specific activities help to recover after having been exposed to a stressor. Study participants had to work on difficult mental arithmetic tasks under noisy conditions for 1 h. Subsequently, they were assigned to one of four groups and spent 1 hour on practicing Tai Chi, brisk walking, meditation, or reading neutral material. Analysis showed that Tai Chi led to

Endocrinological Processes

43

a more pronounced decrease in adrenaline than meditation or reading (no difference in comparison to brisk walking was found). Noradrenaline was more elevated after Tai Chi than after reading, a finding that might be explained by the physical nature of Tai Chi exercises. When interpreting this finding one has to bear in mind that all study participants were experienced in Tai Chi practice. Thus, the conclusion that Tai Chi is the best recovery strategy might be premature. Rather, it might be that the optimal fit between individual preferences for a specific activity and the pursuit of this activity might be most beneficial for recovery. In their meta-analysis summarizing laboratory research on acute stressors and cortisol responses, Dickerson and Kemeny (2004) found that cortisol levels return to their baseline levels by 40 to 60 min after the termination of the stressor. Tasks that were uncontrollable and that were associated with self-evaluative threat lead to higher cortisol levels than other tasks. Mediator analysis further indicated that higher cortisol levels during the poststressor period were mainly due to higher cortisol responses immediately following the exposure to the stressful task. Thus, uncontrollability and selfevaluative threat are not directly related to slow recovery but result in slower recovery because they elicit more pronounced cortisol responses. However, Dickerson and Kemeny have noted that variance in cortisol recovery remained unexplained when predicting recovery from peak cortisol responses, indicating that there are additional factors that probably impact on the recovery process. Based on findings from research on catecholamine recovery (Johansson, 1976; Johansson & Frankenhaeuser, 1973; Lundberg et al., 1993) one might speculate that both stable individual characteristics and more transient states, as well as situational variables might play a role here. It is difficult to directly compare catecholamine and cortisol recovery because most studies on catecholamine recovery used urinary measures whereas Dickerson and Kemeny’s (2004) meta-analysis on cortisol recovery included only studies with blood and salivary cortisol measures. The observation that individuals differ largely in the degree of catecholamine (Johansson & Frankenhaeuser, 1973) and cortisol (Dickerson & Kemeny, 2004) recovery points to important research questions to be addressed in future research.

Field Research on Catecholamine and Cortisol Recovery In addition to laboratory research, also field studies examined catecholamine and cortisol recovery. Kuiper, van der Beek, and Meijman (1998)

44

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

examined daytime and evening urinary catecholamine levels in 28 truck drivers during working days and during rest days. Analyses showed that daytime catecholamine levels were higher on working days than on rest days. Interestingly, also evening catecholamine levels were elevated on working days as compared to rest days. These findings may suggest that work stressors encountered during the working day may have an effect on adrenaline and noradrenaline secretion during evening hours. Other studies searched for factors that might be responsible for increased catecholamine levels during evenings of working days. In an early study, Rissler (1976) examined adrenaline excretion in a sample of female employees of an insurance company before, during, and after a period of overtime. To cope with the extra workload during the overtime period, most women decided to work on Saturdays and Sundays. Compared to the pre-overtime period, urinary adrenaline levels – with urine samples being collected on Tuesdays – were observed. Adrenaline was elevated both at daytime during work and during evening hours after work. This finding may suggest that increased workload is not only reflected in elevated adrenaline levels during work, but also in elevated levels and slow unwinding at home after work. However, an alternative explanation cannot be ruled out. Because most women worked on Saturdays and Sundays during the overtime period, they had less time available for accomplishing housework duties during the weekend. Maybe they spent the evening hours during the week for catching up with housework obligations that might have caused the elevated evening adrenaline levels. Lundberg and Palm (1989) examined workload and catecholamines in 26 families with a child of age six. Urinary adrenaline and noradrenaline were collected on a Saturday or Sunday at home. Analyses revealed a positive correlation between overtime at work and adrenaline excretion during the weekend in women, but not in men. Workload was not related to noradrenaline excretion, neither in women nor in men. Amount of household duties was not related to adrenaline or noradrenaline levels. These findings might imply that overtime causes delayed adrenaline recovery in women. However, elevated adrenaline levels in women working overtime might also imply that these women must accomplish more non-work duties during the weekend resulting in elevated adrenaline levels during Saturdays and Sundays. Meijman, Mulder, Van Dormolen, and Cremer (1992) examined 30 male Dutch driving examiners during working days with varying degrees of workload. The researchers collected urinary adrenaline and noradrenaline during the working days, in the evenings of these working days and during

Endocrinological Processes

45

days off work. Until 2 p.m. adrenaline levels did not differ between the working days with varying degrees of workload. However, in the afternoon, adrenaline levels were higher on the days with a highly intensive workload (i.e., 11 driving examinations per day) than on the days with a relatively low or a medium workload (i.e., 9 or 10 driving examinations per day). Interestingly, on the highly intensive working days, adrenaline levels remained elevated during the evening until the driving examiners went to bed. With respect to noradrenaline, no differences were found. The adrenaline findings may indicate that it is more difficult to unwind after a highly intensified working day. However, also anticipation effects may have occurred as driving examiners knew in advance whether they would have to cope with a high workload during the next working day. Melin, Lundberg, Soederlund, and Granqvist (1999) studied neuroendocrinological stress responses and recovery in a sample of 36 male and 29 female assembly workers in a car engine factory. More specifically, they contrasted employees working at more traditional assembly lines with employees in a more flexible work organization that offered more independence, more variation, and greater opportunities to learn new skills. Urinary catecholamine and cortisol levels were assessed at work and 2 h after work while being at home. Employees at the more traditional assembly line had higher adrenaline levels at home than employees in the more flexible work organization – even after controlling for adrenaline baseline levels. With respect to noradrenaline, a gender
work organization interaction was found. Men working in the more flexible work organization had higher noradrenaline levels at home than men working at the traditional assembly line. Women had higher noradrenaline levels at home when working at the traditional assembly line than women working in the more flexible work organization. The authors offer several interpretations for this interaction effect. First, they suggest that women may have benefited more from the flexible system because they were more capable in coping with social pressures associated with the flexible system. Second, it may be that the flexible system provides more opportunities to combine demands from the work and the non-work domain because it makes it easier to be absent from work when necessary because of non-work duties. No differences in home cortisol levels between employees working in the two types of work organization were found. In their study that addressed physiological outcomes of job demands and job control in 136 registered nurses, Fox et al. (1993) found that an objective measure of patient contact time was positively related to home salivary cortisol levels with cortisol collected 2–3 h after return from work.

46

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

In addition, an interaction effect was found: the relationship between patient contact time and home cortisol levels was particularly high in nurses experiencing low job control. Interestingly, patient contact time was not related to work cortisol levels. These findings suggest that there are work characteristics that do not directly impact on the immediate cortisol response but are related to elevated cortisol levels later on. Although third variable explanations cannot be ruled out completely, one may speculate that specific work demands such as patient contact time cause nurses to ruminate about their work and to experience negative mood at home which in turn might increase cortisol levels (cf., Smyth et al., 1998). Most interestingly, cortisol levels after work were related to subsequent health care cost, but cortisol levels during work were not (Ganster et al., 2001). Thus, this finding suggests that recovery processes including quick decrease in cortisol levels might be particularly important for an individuals’ health. Grebner, Elfering, and Semmer (1999, cited in Semmer et al., 2004) examined cortisol levels in middle-aged male instructors on a working day and a day off. Instructors that rather consistently showed lower cortisol levels on the day off were categorized as responders and were assumed to be more able to recover from work. The responders experienced higher social support by their spouse, more cooperation latitude at work, a less resigned attitude towards work, and a tendency to experience less emotional spillover, and higher well-being in the evening. Thus, particularly social resources at work and at home might help to recover from job stress. To sum up, both laboratory studies and field studies showed that after stressful tasks and a period of high workload adrenaline levels remain elevated (Lundberg et al., 1993; Meijman et al., 1992; Rissler, 1976). These findings offer several interpretations. First, in some of the field studies it cannot be ruled out that high workload (particularly overtime) leads to increased non-work activities during off-job time and therefore to relatively high adrenaline levels during these off-job periods. Second, anticipation effects might have occurred. Third, stressful tasks and high workload lead to elevated adrenaline levels during the recovery period. Here, more research is needed. Compared to the findings on reduced adrenaline recovery after the exposure to stressors, for noradrenaline and cortisol recovery the picture is less clear. It might be that particularly for cortisol recovery job control plays a crucial role (Fox et al., 1993). In addition, research showed that the recovery process differs substantially between persons (Johansson & Frankenhaeuser, 1973) and between situations (Jin, 1992). It will be an interesting avenue for future research to systematically examine the factors that enhance fast recovery.

Endocrinological Processes

47

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION There is broad evidence from laboratory research that the exposure to stressful tasks is related to an increase in adrenaline levels. Also cortisol levels increase, particularly when the situation is characterized by low control and/or high self-evaluative threat. With respect to noradrenaline, the picture is less clear. However, it seems that the combination of two stressors leads to an increase in noradrenaline levels. Studies further suggest that control has a differential effect on the relationship between the exposure to stressful tasks and adrenaline secretion and the relationship between the exposure to stressful tasks and cortisol secretion, respectively. Control offers the opportunity to increase effort in a demanding and stressful situation (Frankenhaeuser et al., 1980). As a consequence, catecholamine levels increase. At the same time, control is a protecting factor with respect to the cortisol response. Cortisol responses to stressful tasks are particularly high when control is low (Dickerson & Kemeny, 2004). Field studies comparing catecholamine and cortisol levels on and off the job have shown that catecholamine levels are higher on the job than off the job. With respect to cortisol no such difference was found, however, the cortisol awakening response was more pronounced during working days. Catecholamines may increase as a response to the specific demands and effort that have to be invested at work, whereas the cortisol response reflects self-evaluative threat emotional stress that might be even higher off the job (Grebner et al., 2004). When it comes to the effects of acute stressors at work that vary from day to day or from task to task, most studies found that acute stressors are related to an increase in catecholamines (particularly in adrenaline) and cortisol. Experience-sampling studies suggest that momentary negative mood is responsible for the increased cortisol response in stressful situations. Field studies on the relationship between work characteristics and catecholamines failed to find any consistent relationship between general workload and baseline adrenaline or noradrenaline levels. However, specific aspects of workload, particularly mental demands and accumulated workload were related to elevated catecholamine levels. With respect to job control and job strain, the findings remain inconclusive. Here, moderator variables might play a role. For example, Dienstbier (1989) has suggested that physical ‘‘toughness’’ might be important. Similarly, workload does not seem to be associated with elevated baseline cortisol levels under all circumstances. However, there is some evidence that

48

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

high workload is related to cortisol in specific groups of employees (e.g., employees with low job control, employees with low status jobs, or high selfmonitoring individuals). Low job control seems to be related to elevated cortisol levels, particularly in men. There is also some evidence that poor social conditions at the workplace (e.g., unfavorable leadership style) are associated with elevated cortisol levels. However, social support does not seem to be of particular relevance. Taken together, research evidence on chronic work stressors and other stable aspects of the workplace is far less conclusive than research on acute stressors. There are several reasons for this pattern of finding. First, because catecholamines and cortisol react strongly to acute stressors and other situational factors, momentary states, and situational variables may mask the effects of more chronic work situation variables. As a consequence, it will be difficult to detect relationships between chronic work situation variables on the one hand and catecholamine and cortisol levels on the other, particularly when catecholamine and cortisol measures are assessed at one single measurement occasion. Second, neuroendocrine processes, particularly the HPA axis habituate quickly to regularly occurring stressors. Therefore, when work stressors lose their novelty, cortisol responses become less pronounced. Third, research on traumatic and chronic life stress has shown that a high degree of stressfulness can also lead to hypocortisolism, that is a decrease of the cortisol response (Heim, Ehlert, & Hellhammer, 2000). Therefore, it might be that in the case of chronic work stressors some individuals react with an increase in cortisol secretion whereas others respond with a decrease. For the sample as a whole, however, no relationship between chronic stressors and cortisol levels will become evident. Fourth, laboratory research suggests that the relationship between stressors and neuroendocrine responses might be rather complex and might depend on additional situational variables. For example, Dickerson and Kemeny (2004) have shown that it is not the stressfulness of the situation but its uncontrollability and associated self-evaluative threat that cause pronounced cortisol responses. Therefore, one can assume that also with respect to chronic stressors, specific situational configurations might be responsible for neuroendocrine reactions. Research showed that catecholamine and cortisol levels remain elevated for some time after the stressor has ended. In addition, research suggests that particularly adrenaline levels remain high after the exposure to a stressful task or after a high workload day. In addition, a substantial variation in the speed of catecholamine and cortisol recovery has been observed.

Endocrinological Processes

49

Directions for Future Research More research is needed on the relationship between work characteristics on the one hand and catecholamine and cortisol levels on the other. In the areas where relationships between chronic work situation variables and neuroendocrine responses have been found (e.g., with respect to the relationship between mental demands and catecholamine levels), longitudinal studies should be conducted. Present research evidence is mainly based on crosssectional designs that cannot rule out alternative interpretations. In areas where research evidence on the relationships between chronic work situation variables and neuroendocrine responses are inconclusive, methodologically more sound studies are needed. First, it should be ensured that catecholamine and cortisol measures that should reflect chronic levels of work situation variables are not affected by physical activities or drug intake (e.g., caffeine). Therefore, it is of particular importance that study participants comply with the study protocol of refraining from specific activities and/or exactly report any deviation from the protocol (cf. Semmer et al., 2004). Second, other potentially confounding variables should be controlled for. For example, we suggest to control for acute stressors and for momentary affect, particularly negative mood. Third, researchers should not rely on single assessments of neuroendocrine responses but rather aggregate catecholamines and cortisol measures that have been assessed on multiple occasions (cf., Pruessner et al., 1997; Semmer et al., 2004). In addition, a more systematic investigation of interaction effects between various aspects of the work situation is needed. For example, it might not just be the interaction between high workload and low job control that results in elevated catecholamine and cortisol reactions. With respect to catecholamines (particularly adrenaline), the actual use of job control might be relevant. Job control might attenuate the relationship between workload and adrenaline secretion if job control is used to reduce mental effort. However, if job control is used for increasing mental effort, the relationship between workload and adrenaline secretion will increase. With respect to cortisol responses, self-relevant processes might be particularly important (Dickerson & Kemeny, 2004). Several studies have found differential effects for males and females. For example, low job control was associated with increased cortisol responses in men, but not in women (Ha¨renstam & Theorell, 1990; Kunz-Ebrecht et al., 2004b). More research is needed that examines potential reasons for these gender-specific findings more systematically. Here, one might think of differences in job conditions, role expectations, and non-work obligations between men and women.

50

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

To guide future studies on interaction effects, a theory-based perspective is needed. Here, theoretical work that is grounded both on sound knowledge about endocrinological processes and about work situation variables is necessary. In addition, when examining interaction effects one has to bear in mind that it is difficult to detect such interaction effects in field settings. Therefore, it is important to study sufficiently large samples – a particular challenge for researchers given the time and effort needed to collect neuroendocrinological data. Research has shown that individuals respond to acute stressors with increased catecholamine and cortisol secretion. However, the associations between chronic stressors and neuroendocrine responses are comparably weak and inconsistent – a finding that can be explained by habituation processes. It would be a particularly interesting question for future research to examine how such habituation processes occur in the work context. In laboratory settings, individuals habituate rather quickly to specific stressors. However, in field settings, stressors might not always be identical but vary from situation to situation. Therefore, it would be interesting to know if and how individuals habituate to slightly different stressors. In addition, it is important to examine how individuals react to complex novel stressors they encounter at the workplace. Such a research question could be addressed by examining newcomers in an organization (e.g., Morrison, 1993) or employees in situations in which major organizational changes occur. We suggest that future research on job-related endocrinological processes should pay more attention to recovery processes because delayed recovery may have a negative impact on health. More specifically, future research should address the question whether exposure to stressful tasks and workload leads to elevated adrenaline levels during off-job periods. Here, it is most important to use experimental or longitudinal designs that allow for ruling out alternative interpretations (e.g., increased demands to be met during off-job time, anticipation of future stressors). In addition, as there is a great variation in speed of catecholamine and cortisol recovery between individuals and situations, it would be a particularly interesting and important avenue for future research to examine the factors that contribute to fast recovery. Here, more stable individual difference variables, momentary states as well as situational variables might play a role. In addition, specific activities that are performed during the recovery period warrant research attention. Identifying factors that support fast recovery is also of great practical relevance. If future research succeeds in identifying factors that promote recovery, individuals could deliberately pursue these activities in order to quickly recover from stressful events.

Endocrinological Processes

51

To sum up, studies on endocrinological processes are an important and promising part of job stress research. By focusing on catecholamine and cortisol responses we neglected other potentially relevant endocrinological indicators. Our review has shown that research on endocrinological processes faces specific methodological challenges (cf. Semmer et al., 2004) and calls for advancements in theory development. It is a major finding of our review that the most obvious differences did not become evident between laboratory versus field studies (cf. Biondi & Picardi, 1999), but between field studies on acute versus chronic work situation variables. This result suggests that job stress research in general should pay more attention to the different impacts of acute and chronic stressors.

REFERENCES Adam, E. K., & Gunnar, M. R. (2001). Relationship functioning and home and work demands predict individual differences in diurnal cortisol patterns in women. Psychoendocrinology, 26, 189–208. Anderze´n, I., & Arnetz, B. B. (1999). Psychophysiological reactions to international adjustment. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 68, 67–75. Arnetz, B. B., Brenner, S.-O., Levi, L., Hjelm, R., Petterson, I.-L., Wasserman, J., Petrini, B., Kallner, A., & Kvetnansky, A. (1991). Neuroendocrine and immunologic effects of unemployment and job insecurity. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 55, 76–80. Axelsson, J., Akerstedt, T., Kecklund, G., Lindqvist, A., & Attefors, R. (2003). Hormonal changes in satisfied and dissatisfied shift workers across a shift cycle. Journal of Applied Physiology, 95, 2099–2105. Bassett, J. R., Marshall, P. M., & Spillane, R. (1987). The physiological measurement of acute stress (public speaking) in bank employees. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 5, 265–273. Biondi, M., & Picardi, A. (1999). Psychological stress and neuroendocrine function in humans: The last two decades of research. Psychotherapy & Psychosomatics, 68, 114–150. Brandsta¨dter, J., Baltes-Go¨tz, B., Kirschbaum, C., & Hellhammer, D. (1991). Developmental and personality correlates of adrenocortical activity as indexed by salivary cortisol: Observations in the age range of 35 to 65 years. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 35, 173–185. Brown, D. E., & James, G. D. (2000). Physiological stress responses in Filipino–American immigrant nurses: The effects of residence time, life-style, and job strain. Psychosomatic Medicine, 62, 394–400. Burton, R. F., Hinton, J. W., Neilson, E., & Beastall, G. (1996). Concentrations of sodium, potassium and cortisol in saliva, and self-reported chronic work stress factors. Biological Psychology, 42, 425–438. Cannon, W. B. (1914). The emergency function of the adrenal medulla in pain and the major emotions. American Journal of Physiology, 33, 356–372. Caplan, R. D., Cobb, S., & French, J. R. P. J. (1979). White-collar workload and cortisol: Disruption of a circadian rhythm by job stress? Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 23, 181–192.

52

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

Carrere, S., Evans, G. W., Palsane, M. N., & Rivas, M. (1991). Job strain and occupational stress among urban public transit operators. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 64, 305–316. Cobb, S. (1974). Physiologic changes in men whose jobs were abolished. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 18, 245–258. Cohen, S., & Herbert, T. B. (1996). Health psychology: Psychological factors and physical disease from the perspective of human psychoneuroimmunology. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 113–142. Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310–357. De Lange, A. H., Taris, T. W., Kompier, M. A. J., Houtman, I. L. D., & Bongers, P. M. (2003). ‘‘The very best of the millenium’’: Longitudinal research and the demand-control-(support) model. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8, 282–305. Dickerson, S. S., & Kemeny, M. E. (2004). Acute stressors and cortisol responses: A theoretical integration and synthesis of laboratory research. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 355–391. Dienstbier, R. A. (1989). Arousal and physiological toughness: Implications for mental and physical health. Psychological Review, 96, 84–100. Dutton, L. M., Smolensky, M. H., Leach, C. S., Lorimor, R., & Hsi, B. P. (1978). Stress levels of ambulance paramedics and fire fighters. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 20, 111–115. Elfering, A., Grebner, S., Semmer, N., Byland, C., & Gerber, H. (2003). Two urinary catecholamine measurement indices for applied stress research: Effects of time and temperature until freezing. Human Factors, 45, 563–574. Elfering, A., Grebner, S., Semmer, N. K., & Gerber, H. (2002). Time control, catecholamines and back pain among young nurses. Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health, 28, 386–393. Ely, D. L., & Mostardi, R. A. (1986). The effect of recent life events stress, life assets, and temperament pattern on cardiovascular risk factors for Akron city police officers. Journal of Human Stress, 12, 77–91. Evans, G. W., & Carrere, S. (1991). Traffic congestion, perceived control, and psychophysiological stress among urban bus drivers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 658–663. Fibiger, W., Christensen, F., Singer, G., & Kaufmann, H. (1986). Mental and physical components of sawmill operatives’ workload. Ergonomics, 29, 363–375. Fibiger, W., & Singer, G. (1989). Biochemical assessment and differentiation of mental and physical effort. Work & Stress, 3, 237–247. Fleming, R., Baum, A., Reddy, D., & Gatchel, R. J. (1984). Behavioral and biochemical effects of job loss and unemployment stress. Journal of Human Stress, 10, 12–17. Forsman, L. (1981). Note on estimating catecholamines in urine sampled after 75 min periods of mental work and inactivity. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 25, 223–225. Fox, M. L., & Dwyer, D. J. (1995). Stressful job demands and worker health: An investigation of the effects of self-monitoring. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 1973–1995. Fox, M. L., Dwyer, D. J., & Ganster, D. C. (1993). Effects of stressful job demands and control on physiological and attitudinal outcomes in a hospital setting. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 289–318. Frankenhaeuser, M. (1981). Coping with stress at work. International Journal of Health Services, 11, 491–510.

Endocrinological Processes

53

Frankenhaeuser, M., & Johansson, G. (1986). Stress at work: Psychobiological and psychosocial aspects. International Review of Applied Psychology, 35, 287–299. Frankenhaeuser, M., Lundberg, U., & Forsman, L. (1980). Dissociation between sympatheticadrenal and pituitary-adrenal responses to an achievement situation characterized by high controllability: Comparison between type A and type B males and females. Biological Psychology, 10, 79–91. Frankenhaeuser, M., Lundberg, U., Fredrikson, M., Melin, B., Tuomisto, M., & Myrsten, A.-L. (1989). Stress on and off the job as related to sex and occupational status in whitecollar workers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10, 321–346. Fried, Y., Rowland, K. M., & Ferris, G. R. (1984). The physiological measurement of work stress: A critique. Personnel Psychology, 37, 583–615. Fujigaki, Y., & Mori, K. (1997). Longitudinal study of work stress among information system professionals. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 9, 369–381. Fujiwara, K., Tsukushima, E., Kasai, S., Masuchi, A., Tsutsumi, A., Kawakami, M., et al. (2004). Urinary catecholamines and salivary cortisol on workdays and days off in relation to job strain among female health care providers. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, 30, 129–138. Ganster, D. C., Fox, M. L., & Dwyer, D. J. (2001). Explaining employees’ health care costs: A prospective examination of stressful job demands, personal control, and physiological reactivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 954–964. Ganster, D. C., & Schaubroeck, J. (1991). Work stress and employee health. Journal of Management, 17, 235–271. Goldstein, I. B., Shapiro, D. L., Chicz-DeMet, A., & Guthrie, D. (1999). Ambulatory blood pressure, heart rate, and neuroendocrine responses in women nurses during work and off work days. Psychosomatic Medicine, 61, 387–396. Grebner, S., Elfering, A., & Semmer, N. K. (2004). Stressful situations at work and in private life among young workers: An event sampling approach. Social Indicators Research, 12, 341–365. Grossi, G., Perski, A., Evengard, B., Blomkvist, V., & Orth-Gome´r, K. (2003). Physiological correlates of burnout among women. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 55, 309–316. Gump, B. B., & Matthews, K. A. (1999). Do background stressors influence reactivity to and recovery from acute stressors? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 469–494. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250–279. Hansen, A. M., Kaergaard, A., Andersen, J. H., & Netterstrom, B. (2003). Associations between repetitive work and endocrinological indicators of stress. Work & Stress, 17, 264–276. Hanson, E. K. S., Maas, C. J. M., Meijman, T. F., & Godaert, G. L. R. (2000). Cortisol secretion throughout the day, perceptions of the work environment, and negative affect. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 22, 316–324. Harenstam, A. B., & Theorell, T. P. (1988). Work conditions and urinary excretion of catecholamines – a study of prison staff in Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, 14, 257–264. Ha¨renstam, A., & Theorell, T. (1990). Cortisol elevation and serum g-glutamyl transpeptidase in response to adverse job conditions: How are they interrelated? Biological Psychology, 31, 157–171.

54

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

Haynes, S. N., Gannon, L. R., Orimoto, L., O’Brien, W. H., & Brandt, M. (1991). Psychophysiological assessment of poststress recovery. Psychological Assessment, 3, 356–365. Heim, C., Ehlert, U., & Hellhammer, D. H. (2000). The potential role of hypocortisolism in the pathophysiology of stress-related bodily disorders. Psychoendocrinology, 25, 1–35. Hennig, J., Kieferdorf, P., Moritz, C., Huwe, S., & Netter, P. (1998). Changes in cortisol secretion during shiftwork: Implications for tolerance to shiftwork. Ergonomics, 41, 610–621. Hockey, G. R., Payne, R. L., & Rick, J. T. (1996). Intra-individual patterns of hormonal and affective adaptation to work demands: An n ¼ 2 study of junior doctors. Biological Psychology, 42, 393–411. Hyyppa, M. T., Aunola, S., Lathela, K., O¨ahti, R., & Marniemi, J. (1983). Psychoendocrine responses to mental load in an achievement-oriented task. Ergonomics, 26, 1155–1162. James, G. D., Schlussel, Y. R., & Pickering, T. G. (1993). The association between daily blood pressure and catecholamine variability in normotensive working women. Psychosomatic Medicine, 55, 55–60. Jin, P. (1992). Efficacy of tai chi, brisk walking, meditation, and reading in reducing mental and emotional stress. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 36, 361–370. Johansson, G. (1976). Subjective well-being and temporal patterns of sympathetic–adrenal medullary activity. Biological Psychology, 4, 157–172. Johansson, G., & Aronsson, G. (1984). Stress reactions in computerized administrative work. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 5, 159–181. Johansson, G., Aronsson, G., & Lindstrom, B. O. (1978). Social, psychological and neuroendocrine stress reactions in highly mechanized work. Ergonomics, 21, 583–599. Johansson, G., & Frankenhaeuser, M. (1973). Temporal factors in sympatho-adrenomedullary activity following acute behavioral activation. Biological Psychology, 1, 63–73. Karasek, R. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285–306. Karasek, R., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work: Stress, productivity and the reconstruction of working life. New York: Basic Books. Kasl, S. V. (1978). Epidemiological contributions to the study of work stress. In: C. L. Cooper & R. Pane (Eds), Stress at work (pp. 3–48). Chichester: Wiley. Kirschbaum, C., & Hellhammer, D. H. (1989). Salivary cortisol in psychobiological research: An overview. Neuropsychobiology, 22, 150–169. Kirschbaum, C., & Hellhammer, D. H. (1994). Salivary cortisol in psychoneuroendocrine research: Recent developments and applications. Psychoendocrinology, 19, 313–333. Knox, S. S., Theorell, T., Svensson, J. C., & Waller, D. (1985). The relation of social support and working environment to medical variables associated with elevated blood pressure in young males: A structural model. Social Science & Medicine, 21, 525–531. Korunka, C., Huemer, K.-H., Litschauer, B., Karetta, B., & Kafka-Lutzow, A. (1996). Working with new technologies: Horme excretion as an indicator for sustained arousal: A pilot study. Biological Psychology, 42, 439–452. Kuiper, J. I., Van der Beck, A. J., & Meijman, T. F. (1998). Psychosomatic complaints and unwinding of sympathoadrenal activation after work. Stress Medicine, 14, 7–12. Kunz-Ebrecht, S. R., Kirschbaum, C., Marmot, M., & Steptoe, A. (2004a). Differences in cortisol awakening response on work days and weekends in women and men from the Whitehall ii cohort. Psychoendocrinology, 29, 516–528.

Endocrinological Processes

55

Kunz-Ebrecht, S. R., Kirschbaum, C., & Steptoe, A. (2004b). Work stress, socioeconomic status and neuroendocrine activation over the working day. Social Science and Medicine, 58, 1523–1530. Kurina, L. M., Schneider, B., & Waite, L. J. (2004). Stress, symptoms of depression and anxiety, and cortisol patterns in working parents. Stress and Health, 20, 53–63. Leppaluoto, J., Korhonen, I., & Hassi, J. (2001). Habituation of thermal sensations, skin temperatures, and norepinephrine in men exposed to cold air. Journal of Applied Physiology, 90, 1211–1218. Linden, W., Earle, T. L., Gerin, W., & Christenfeld, N. (1997). Physiological stress reactivity and recovery: Conceptual siblings separated at birth? Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 42, 117–135. Lovallo, W. R., & Thomas, T. L. (2000). Stress hormones in psychophysiological research: Emotional, behavioral, and cognitive implications. In: J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary & G. G. Berntson (Eds), Handbook of psychophysiology (pp. 342–367). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Luecken, L. J., Suarez, E. C., Kuhn, C. M., Barefoot, J. C., Blumenthal, J. A., Siegler, I. C., et al. (1997). Stress in employed women: Impact of marital status and children at home on neurohormone output and home strain. Psychosomatic Medicine, 59, 352–359. Lundberg, U. (1995). Methods and applications of stress research. Technology and Health Care, 3, 3–9. Lundberg, U., Elfsberg Dohns, I., Melin, B., Sandsjo, L., Palmerud, G., Kadefors, R., Ekstro¨m, M., & Parr, D. (1999). Psychophysiological stress responses, muscle tension, and neck and shoulder pain among supermarket cashiers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 245–255. Lundberg, U., & Forsman, L. (1979). Adrenal–medullary and adrenal–cortical responses to understimulation and overstimulation: Comparison between type A and type B persons. Biological Psychology, 9, 79–89. Lundberg, U., & Frankenhaeuser, M. (1980). Pituitary–adrenal and sympathetic–adrenal correlates of distress and effort. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 24, 125–130. Lundberg, U., Granqvist, M., Hannson, T., Magnusson, M., & Wallin, L. (1989). Psychological and physiological stress responses during repetitive work at an assembly line. Work & Stress, 3, 143–153. Lundberg, U., & Hellstro¨m, B. (2002). Workload and morning salivary cortisol in women. Work & Stress, 16, 356–363. Lundberg, U., & Lindfors, P. (2002). Psychophysiological reactions to telework in female and male white-collar workers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7, 354–364. Lundberg, U., Melin, B., Evans, G. W., & Holmberg, L. (1993). Physiological deactivation after two contrasting tasks at a video display terminal: Learning vs. repetitive data entry. Ergnomics, 36, 601–611. Lundberg, U., & Palm, K. (1989). Workload and catecholamine excretion in parents of preschool children. Work and Stress, 3, 255–260. Mason, J. W. (1968). Organization of psychoendocrine mechanisms. Psychosomatic Medicine, 30, 791–808. Matthews, K. A., Gump, B. B., & Owens, J. F. (2001). Chronic stress influences cardiovascular and neuroendorine responses during acute stress and recovery, especially in men. Health Psychology, 20, 403–410.

56

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

McCann, B. S., Carter, J., Vaughan, M., Raskind, M., Wilkinson, C. W., & Veith, R. C. (1993). Cardiovascular and neuroendocrine responses to extended laboratory challenge. Psychosomatic Medicine, 55, 497–504. McEwen, B. S. (1998). Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators. New England Journal of Medicine, 338, 171–179. Meijman, T. F., Mulder, G., Van Dormolen, M., & Cremer, R. (1992). Workload of driving examiners: A psychophysiological field study. In: H. Kragt (Ed.), Enhancing industrial performances (pp. 245–260). London: Taylor & Francis. Melamed, S., Ugarten, U., Shirom, A., Kahana, L., Lerman, Y., & Froom, P. (1999). Chronic burnout, somatic arousal and elevated salivary cortisol levels. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 46, 591–598. Melin, B., Lundberg, U., Soederlund, J., & Granqvist, M. (1999). Psychological and physiological stress reactions of male and female assembly workers: A comparison between two difference forms of work organization. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 47–61. Morrison, E. W. (1993). Longitudinal study of the effects of information seeking on newcomer socialization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 173–183. Mulder, G., Mulder, L. J. M., Meijman, T. F., Veldman, J. B. P., & van Roon, A. (2000). A psychophysiological approach to working conditions. In: R. W. Backs & W. Boucsein (Eds), Engineering psychophysiology: Issues and applications (pp. 139–159). Mahwah, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Mulders, H. G. P., Meijman, T. F., O’Hanlon, J. F., & Mulder, G. (1982). Differential psychophysiological reactivity of city bus drivers. Ergonomics, 25, 1003–1011. Netterstom, B., & Hansen, A. M. (2000). Outsourcing and stress: Physiological effects on bus drivers. Stress Medicine, 16, 149–160. Ockenfels, M. C., Porter, L., & Smyth, J. (1995). Effect of chronic stress associated with unemployment on salivary cortisol: Overall cortisol levels, diurnal rhythm, and acute stress reactivity. Psychosomatic Medicine, 57, 460–467. Ohlson, C.-G., So¨derfeld, M., So¨derfeld, B., Jones, I., & Theorell, T. (2001). Stress markers in relation to job strain in human service organizations. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 70, 268–275. Payne, R. L., Rick, J. T., Smith, G. H., & Cooper, R. G. (1984). Multiple indicators of stress in an ‘active’ job: Cardiothoracic surgery. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 26, 805–808. Piercecchi-Marti, M. D., Leonetti, G., Pelissier, A. L., Conrath, J., Cianfarani, F., & Valli, M. (1999). Evaluation of biological stress markers in police officers. Medicine and Law, 18, 125–144. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. Pollard, T. M., Ungpakorn, G., Ainsworth Harrison, G., & Parkes, K. R. (1996). Epinephrine and cortisol responses to work: A test of the models of Frankenhaeuser and Karasek. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 18, 229–237. Pruessner, J. C., Gaab, J., Hellhammer, D. H., Lintz, D., Schommer, N., & Kirschbaum, C. (1997). Increasing correlations between personality traits and cortisol stress responses obtained by data aggregation. Psychoendocrinology, 22, 615–625. Pruessner, M., Hellhammer, D. H., & Pruessner, J. C. (2003). Self-reported depressive symptoms and stress levels in healthy young men: Associations with the cortisol response to awakening. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65, 92–99.

Endocrinological Processes

57

Raggatt, P. T. F., & Morrissey, S. A. (1997). A field study of stress and fatigue in long-distance bus drivers. Behavioral Medicine, 23, 122–129. Rick, T., & Acton, S. (1988). Acute and chronic stress in cardiothoracic anaesthetists. Stress Medicine, 4, 3–9. Rissler, A. (1976). Stress reactions at work and after work during a period of quantitative overload. Ergonomics, 20, 577–580. Ritvanen, T., Louhevaara, V., Helin, P., Halonen, T., & Hanninen, O. (2003). Psychophysiological stress in high school teachers. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 16, 255–264. Roberts, D. (2002). In-season physiological and biochemical status of reforestation workers. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 44, 559–567. Rose, R. M., Jenkins, C. D., Hurst, M., Herds, J. A., & Hall, R. P. (1982). Endocrine activity in air traffic controllers at work. II. Biological, psychological and work correlates. Psychoendocrinology, 7, 113–123. Sapolsky, R. M., Romero, L. M., & Munck, A. U. (2000). How do glucocorticoids influence stress responses? Integrating permissive, suppressive, stimulatory, and preparative actions. Endocrine Reviews, 21, 55–89. Schaubroeck, J., & Ganster, D. C. (1993). Chronic demands and responsivity to challenge. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 73–85. Schlotz, W., Hellhammer, J., Schulz, P., & Stone, A. (2004). Perceived work overload and chronic worrying predict weekend–weekday differences in the cortisol awakening response. Psychosomatic Medicine, 66, 207–214. Schnorpfeil, P., Noll, A., Schulze, R., Ehlert, U., Frey, K., & Fischer, J. E. (2003). Allostatic load and work conditions. Social Science and Medicine, 57, 647–656. Schulz, P., Kirschbaum, C., Pru¨Xner, J., & Hellhammer, D. (1998). Increased free cortisol secretion after awakening in chronically stressed individuals due to work overload. Stress Medicine, 14, 91–97. Seeman, T. E., Singer, B. H., Rowe, J. W., Horwitz, R. I., & McEwen, B. S. (1997). Price of adaptation: Allostatic load and its health consequences. Archives of Internal Medicine, 157, 2259–2268. Selye, H. (1956). The stress of life. New York: McGraw-Hill. Semmer, N. K., Grebner, S., & Elfering, A. (2004). Beyond self-report: Using observational, physiological, and situation-based measures in research on occupational stress. In: P. L. Perrewe´ & D. C. Ganster (Eds), Research in occupational stress and well-being: Emotional and physiological processes and positive intervention strategies (Vol. 3, pp. 20–263). Amsterdam, NL: Elsevier. Siegrist, J. (1996). Adverse health effects of high effort/low reward conditions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 27–41. Siegrist, J. (1998). Adverse health effects of effort–reward imbalance at work: Theory, empirical support, and implications for prevention. In: C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of organizational stress (pp. 190–204). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sluiter, J. K., Frings-Dresen, M. H., & van der Beek, A. J. (2000a). A forward-facilitating influence of cortisol on catecholamines assessed during the work of garbage collectors. Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health, 26, 26–31. Sluiter, J. K., Frings-Dresen, M. H., van der Beek, A. J., Meijman, T. F., & Heisterkamp, S. H. (2000b). Neuroendocrine reactivity and recovery from work with different physical and mental demands. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, 26, 306–316.

58

SABINE SONNENTAG AND CHARLOTTE FRITZ

Sluiter, J. K., Frings-Dresen, M. H. W., van der Beek, A. J., & Meijman, T. F. (2001). The relation between work-induced neuroendocrine reactivity and recovery, subjective need for recovery, and health status. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 50, 29–37. Smyth, J., Ockenfels, M. C., Porter, L., Kirschbaum, C., Hellhammer, D. H., & Stone, A. A. (1998). Stressors and mood measured on a momentary basis are associated with salivary cortisol secretion. Psychoendocrinology, 23, 353–370. Sonnentag, S., & Frese, M. (2003). Stress in organizations. In: W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen & R. J. Klimoski (Eds), Comprehensive handbook of psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 453–491). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Spillane, R. (1984). Stress at work: A review of Australian research. International Journal of Health Services, 14, 589–604. Steptoe, A., Cropley, M., Griffith, J., & Kirschbaum, C. (2000). Job strain and anger expression predict early morning elevations in salivary cortisol. Psychosomatic Medicine, 62, 286–292. Steptoe, A., Kunz-Ebrecht, S., Owen, N., Feldman, P. J., Willemsen, G., Kirschbaum, C., et al. (2003). Socioeconomic status and stress-related biological responses over the working day. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65, 461–470. Steptoe, A., Siegrist, J., Kirschbaum, C., & Marmot, M. (2004). Effort–reward imbalance, overcommitment, and measures of cortisol and blood pressure over the working day. Psychosomatic Medicine, 66, 323–329. Steptoe, A., Wardle, J., Lipsey, Z., Mills, R., Oliver, G., Jarvis, M., et al. (1998). A longitudinal study of work load and variations in psychological well-being, cortisol, smoking, and alcohol consumption. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 20, 84–91. Stone, A. A., Schwartz, J. E., Smyth, J., Kirschbaum, C., Cohen, S., Hellhammer, D., et al. (2001). Individual differences in the diurnal cycle of salivary free cortisol: A replication of flattened cycles for some individuals. Psychoendocrinology, 26, 295–306. Stowell, J. R., McGuire, L., Robles, T., Glaser, R., & Kiecolt-Glaser, J. (2003). Psychoneuroimmunology. In: A. M. Nezu, C. M. Nezu & P. A. Geller (Eds), Handbook of psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 75–95). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Theorell, T., Ahlberg-Hulten, G., Sigala, F., Perski, A., Soderholm, M., Kallner, A., et al. (1990). A psychosocial and biomedical comparison between men in six contrasting service occupations. Work and Stress, 4, 51–63. Theorell, T., Perski, A., Akerstedt, T., Sigala, F., Ahlberg-Hulte´n, G., Svennson, J., et al. (1988). Changes in job strain in relation to changes in physiological state. Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health, 14, 189–196. Toivanen, H., La¨nsimies, E., Jokela, V., Helin, P., Penttila¨, I., & Ha¨nninen, O. (1996). Plasma level of adrenal hormones in working women during an economic recession and the threat of unemployment: Impact of regular relaxation training. Journal of Psychophysiology, 10, 36–48. Uchino, B. N., Cacioppo, J. T., & Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K. (1996). The relationship between social support and physiological processes: A review with emphasis on underlying mechanisms and implications for health. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 488–531. van der Beek, A. J., Meijman, T. F., Frings-Dresen, M. H. W., Kuiper, J. I., & Kuiper, S. (1995). Lorry drivers’ work stress evaluated by catecholamines excreted in urine. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 52, 464–469. van Eck, M., Berkhof, H., Nicolson, N. A., & Sulon, J. (1996). The effects of perceived stress, traits, mood states, and stressful daily events on salivary cortisol. Psychosomatic Medicine, 58, 447–458.

Endocrinological Processes

59

van Eck, M., & Nicolson, N. A. (1994). Perceived stress and salivary cortisol in daily life. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 16, 221–227. Vangelova, K. K., & Deyanov, C. E. (2000). The effect of high ambient temperature on the adjustment of operators to fast-rotating 12 h shiftwork. Reviews in Environmental Health, 15, 373–379. Vangelova, K., Deyanov, C., Velkova, D., Ivanova, M., & Stanchev, V. (2002). The effect of heat exposure on cortisol and catecholamine excretion rates in workers in glass manufacturing unit. Central European Journal of Public Health, 10, 149–152. Vivoli, G., Bergomi, M., Rovesti, S., Carrozzi, G., & Vezzosi, A. (1993). Biochemical and heamodynamic indicators of stress in truck drivers. Ergonomics, 36, 1089–1097. Wall, T. D., Jackson, P. R., Mullarkey, S., & Parker, S. K. (1996). The demands-control model of job strain: A more specific test. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69, 153–166. Wu¨st, S., Federonko, I., Hellhammer, D., & Kirschbaum, C. (2000). Genetic factors, perceived chronic stress, and the free cortisol response to awakening. Psychoendocrinology, 25, 707–720. Yehuda, R., Resnick, H., Kahana, L., & Giller, E. L. (1993). Long-lasting hormonal alterations to extreme stress in humans: Normative or maladaptive. Psychosomatic Medicine, 55, 287–297. Zeier, H., Brauchli, P., & Joller-Jemelka, H. I. (1996). Effects of work demands on Immunoglobulin A and cortisol in air traffic controllers. Biological Psychology, 42, 413–423.

This page intentionally left blank

60

HEALTH CONSEQUENCES OF WORK–FAMILY CONFLICT: THE DARK SIDE OF THE WORK–FAMILY INTERFACE Jeffrey H. Greenhaus, Tammy D. Allen and Paul E. Spector ABSTRACT In this chapter, we review the literature on the relationship of work– family conflict with health outcomes and well-being. We discuss the meaning of work–family conflict and then present a theoretical model that depicts the psychological process by which work–family conflict affects negative emotions, dissatisfaction with life and its component roles, health-related behavior, and physical health. We conclude with suggestions regarding the development of a future research agenda.

Research on the work–family interface has exploded over the past 25 years (Eby, Casper, Lockwood, Bordeaux, & Brinley, 2005; Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). Increasing proportions of dual-earner couples and single-parents in the workforce, changes in gender-role norms, and shifts in values toward greater life balance have made work–family issues salient to employees and Employee Health, Coping and Methodologies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 5, 61–98 Copyright r 2006 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(05)05002-X

61

62

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

employers and popular to scholars in a wide variety of disciplines (Barling & Sorensen, 1997; Barnett, 1998, 1999; Barnett & Hyde, 2001; Edwards & Rothbard, 2000; Lambert, 1990; Repetti, 1987). This growing body of research has convincingly erased the myth of the separate worlds of work and family (Kanter, 1977), and has replaced this myth with insights into the many ways in which work and family lives are interdependent (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000). The number of constructs related to the work–family interface has grown in proportion to the emerging empirical research. Many of these concepts represent linking mechanisms by which work and family lives affect one another; accommodation, compensation, resource drain, spillover, work– family conflict, and facilitation or enrichment (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000; Greenhaus & Powell, 2006; Lambert, 1990). Other concepts are intended to capture the manner in which individuals prioritize roles or move between activities in different roles, such as balance (Marks & MacDermid, 1996), segmentation and integration (Ashforth, Kreiner, & Fugate, 2000), and role transitions (Clark, 2002). Of the many concepts that have emerged in the work–family literature, none has been as thoroughly discussed and researched as work–family conflict, the extent to which experiences in work and family roles are mutually incompatible (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). In fact, the work–family literature has been dominated by a conflict perspective that has focused almost exclusively on the interference between these two crucial life domains (Eby et al., 2005). Recent reviews have called for a more balanced approach to the study of work and family life that acknowledges or even emphasizes the positive connections between work and family roles and the benefits that accrue from participation in both roles (Barnett, 1998; Frone, 2003; Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1999). These calls have been answered by a stream of research on work–family facilitation or enrichment that identifies the process by which participation in the work (family) role can enhance the quality of life in the family (work) role (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). Despite the recent interest in the positive connections between work and family life, work–family conflict remains a significant concern for several reasons. First, because work hours have risen substantially in recent years (Brett & Stroh, 2003; Jacobs & Gerson, 1998), the work domain increasingly intrudes on family and personal life (Milliken & Dunn-Jensen, 2005). Second, the literature has consistently revealed that employees who experience extensive work–family conflict suffer a wide variety of negative consequences including diminished satisfaction and performance in the work and family domains and deteriorated physical health and emotional well-being (Allen,

Work–Family Conflict and Health

63

Herst, Bruck, & Sutton, 2000; Bellavia & Frone, 2005; Eby et al., 2005; Frone, 2003; Kossek & Ozeki, 1998; Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005). The connection between work–family conflict and health outcomes is particularly disturbing because of the suffering experienced by employees with significant health problems and the costs borne by employers to address these problems. This chapter examines the negative health consequences of work–family conflict, the dark side of the work–family interface. Despite the accumulated documentation of relationships between work–family conflict and employee health, there are two significant gaps in the literature. First, there has not been a comprehensive review of the health consequences of work–family conflict that considers relationships between various types of work–family conflict and multiple indicators of physical and psychological health. Second, although there is evidence that work–family conflict can have a deleterious effect on health (Allen et al., 2000; Frone, 2003; Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005), relatively little attention has been paid to the psychological processes that explain the impact of work–family conflict on health. This chapter addresses these gaps by reviewing the empirical research that has examined relationships between work–family conflict and health. We also attempt to meld the work–family literature with the broader stress literature to develop a theoretical model that specifies why and under what conditions work–family conflict is associated with deteriorated health. First, we define work–family conflict, identifying the various ways in which work and family roles may be mutually incompatible. Next, we discuss the multiple dimensions of health and well-being. We then examine the literature on the relationships between work–family conflict and health and provide a theoretical model to explain the findings in the literature. We conclude the chapter by offering an agenda for future research regarding the health consequences of work–family conflict.

WORK–FAMILY CONFLICT Work–family conflict is produced by simultaneous pressures from work and family roles that are mutually incompatible (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, & Rosenthal, 1964). Because of incompatible role pressures arising from the work and family domains, effectiveness in one role is hampered by experiences in the other role. In other words, work– family conflict occurs when experiences in a role interfere with meeting the requirements and achieving effectiveness in the other role (Edwards &

64

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

Rothbard, 2000; Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). Therefore, the essence of work–family conflict is interrole interference, and work–family conflict could just as easily be referred to as work–family interference. The dominance of the conflict perspective in the work–family literature has been attributed to an acceptance of a scarcity hypothesis (Marks, 1977; Sieber, 1974) that assumes that time and energy are fixed resources, and that individuals who participate in multiple roles inevitably experience substantial resource drain (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000) that compromises their effectiveness in other life roles. In this respect, the conceptualization and study of work–family conflict has been deeply rooted in a stress perspective (Kahn et al., 1964). Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) identified three forms or types of work–family conflict: time-based conflict, strain-based conflict, and behavior-based conflict. Time-based conflict occurs when the time demands associated with one role restrict the amount of time that can be devoted to the other role, inhibiting one’s performance in the latter role. Strain-based conflict occurs when stress arising in one role is carried or transferred to the other role, with the consequent strain symptoms (e.g., anxiety, irritability) reducing effectiveness in the second role. In behavior-based conflict, a behavior that is effective in one role (e.g., an authoritarian interaction style) is inappropriately applied to the other role reducing one’s effectiveness in the role. Recent research has emphasized the importance of distinguishing the two directions of work–family conflict: work interference with family life (WIF) and family interference with work life (FIW). Moreover, the literature suggests that WIF may have a somewhat different pattern of antecedents and consequences than FIW. Specifically, the antecedents of work–family conflict reside primarily in the role that causes the interference, whereas the consequences of work–family conflict are felt most deeply in the role that is the object of the interference (Frone, 2003). In other words, work (family) demands are the dominant cause of WIF (FIW), and the major consequences of WIF (FIW) are experienced in the family (work) domain. However, the research is not always consistent in this regard (Kossek & Ozeki, 1998; Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005), and it is important to recognize that regardless of the direction of the interference, work–family conflict is triggered by simultaneous pressures or demands in both roles. For example, extensive time demands from work are not likely to interfere with family life for individuals who are not expected to participate in family activities because there are simply not many family role pressures with which work demands can interfere.

Work–Family Conflict and Health

65

Two other trends in the work–family literature are noteworthy. First, the research has generally examined direct self-reports of work–family conflict. Numerous scales of work–family conflict have been developed over the years (Allen et al., 2000), the most recent of which captures both the type of conflict (e.g., time-based) and the direction of the interference (Carlson, Kacmar, & Williams, 2000). It is also possible to infer the presence of work– family conflict or interference through empirical relationships between work-related variables (e.g., hours worked per week) and family related variables (effectiveness as a spouse or parent), although this research strategy is less prominent in the literature. Second, most of the research has examined ongoing or chronic work– family conflict in that the conflict scales tend to assess the extensiveness or frequency of the interference between work and family roles over a period of time. Although the examination of a specific, discrete episode of work– family conflict has certain advantages (Greenhaus & Powell, 2003; Powell & Greenhaus, 2005), chronic work–family conflict seems to be particularly appropriate to an examination of health consequences because these effects are likely to be cumulative over time. Therefore, the emphasis on chronic work–family conflict in the literature should not limit the usefulness of our review or the development of a theoretical model of the health consequences of conflict. Although it is generally agreed that work–family conflict arises from simultaneous pressures from the work and family domains that are incompatible in some respect (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985), we offer a slightly revised definition of work–family conflict in this chapter: the extent to which experiences in the work (family) role result in diminished performance in the family (work) role. This definition explicitly recognizes that work–family conflict represents cross-role interference in performance. For example, time spent in family activities that restricts the amount of time devoted to work does not constitute conflict or interference unless the restricted work time diminishes job performance. Similarly, job-induced stress that is brought home does not represent work–family conflict unless the transported strain symptoms reduce one’s performance in the family domain. Therefore, the negative impact on performance in the receiving (or interfered with) role is a necessary condition for work–family conflict to have occurred (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000). In addition, we extend Greenhaus and Beutell’s (1985) typology of work–family conflict (time, strain, and behavior) by adding a fourth mechanism (energy) by which experiences in one role can diminish performance in the other role. At the risk of oversimplification, and using WIF

66

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

as an example, the four types of conflict can be captured by the following phrases:    

‘‘I ‘‘I ‘‘I ‘‘I

come come come come

home home home home

late’’ (time-based conflict) tired’’ (energy-based conflict) cranky’’ (strain-based conflict) in ‘work mode’’’ (behavior-based conflict)

Note that for any of these four events (coming home late, tired, cranky, or in a work mode) to produce WIF, they must reduce performance in the family domain.

HEALTH AND WELL-BEING Health and well-being have both physical and psychological components, with both being necessary for an individual to be considered in good health (Sanderson, 2004). In the remainder of the chapter, we refer to the negative side of health and well-being (that is, physical and psychological health problems) to emphasize the negative consequences of excessive work–family conflict. Indicators of physical health problems include reports of physical symptoms and overall health problems as well as assessments of specific physiological conditions (e.g., blood pressure, cholesterol) that can contribute to overall physical health problems. Although not strictly an indicator of physical health, we also examine health-related behaviors (‘‘unhealthy behaviors’’) such as unhealthy diets, limited physical exercise, excessive alcohol consumption, and tobacco use because of their effects on overall physical health problems. Psychological health problems include the experience of negative emotions and dissatisfactions. An emotion is an affective state that is connected to a person, object, or event and can be accompanied by physiological or bodily changes (Weiss, 2002). In addition to specific emotions such as depression, anger, and frustration, we examined overall psychological strain and life distress as indicators of a variety of negative emotions. Dissatisfactions include negative evaluations of specific life roles (work dissatisfaction and family dissatisfaction) as well as dissatisfaction with one’s overall life. Although it is difficult to completely separate physical and psychological components of health and well-being, we suggest a series of causal linkages among these indicators to try to explain the various pathways by which work–family conflict impedes health and well-being. We discuss and justify

Work–Family Conflict and Health

67

these linkages among the indicators of health and well-being in a subsequent section of the chapter when we present an integrated model of the health consequences of work–family conflict.

RELATIONSHIPS OF WORK–FAMILY CONFLICT WITH HEALTH AND WELL-BEING Before presenting a theoretical model that is designed to explain the effects of work–family conflict on health and well-being, it is important to document the relationships among the variables we will discuss. The literature provides considerable support for the presence of relationships between work–family conflict and health-related outcomes. In fact, three metaanalyses (Allen et al., 2000; Kossek & Ozeki, 1998; Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005) have documented small to medium effect sizes (ranging from 0.13 to 0.35) depending on the direction of the interference (WIF or FIW) and the particular indicator of health and well-being. We next provide a brief overview of the relationships between work– family conflict and health/well-being that have been observed in the literature. The purpose of this discussion is not to provide an exhaustive or quantitative review of the literature but rather to illustrate the trends in the findings that we have observed. The vast majority of the studies assessed self-reported work–family conflict, many of which measured both directions of interference (WIF and FIW). However, some studies measured only WIF or used scales that either combined the two directions of interference or did not specify the direction of interference (‘‘bidirectional’’). A few of the studies did not measure work–family conflict at all, although one can infer the influence of work–family conflict by virtue of the variables that were examined. First we examine relationships between work–family conflict and psychological health and then turn to relationships between conflict and physical health. Psychological Health Negative Emotions A number of studies examined relationships between work–family conflict and depression, and most, but not all, of these studies assessed depressive mood or symptoms rather than a clinical depressive disorder. The findings provide evidence that employees who experience extensive work–family

68

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

conflict also experience high levels of depression. Moreover, both directions of interference are associated with depression (Frone, Russell, & Barnes, 1996; Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1997; Grzywacz & Bass, 2003; Hammer, Cullen, Neal, Sinclair, & Shafiro, in press; MacEwen & Barling, 1994; Netemeyer, Boles, & McMurrian, 1996; Reifman, Biernat, & Lang, 1991; Schieman, McBrier, & Van Gundy, 2003; Stephens, Franks, & Atienza, 1997; Vinokur, Pierce, & Buck, 1999). Those studies that assessed only WIF (Geurts, Kompier, Roxburgh, & Houtman, 2003; Major, Klein, & Ehrhart, 2002; Tiedje et al., 1990; Thomas & Ganster, 1995) and those that measured bidirectional interference (Beatty, 1996; Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1991; Greenglass, Pantony, & Burke, 1989; Keith & Schafer, 1980) also consistently observed a positive relationship between work–family conflict and depression. It is important to note that most of these studies used cross-sectional designs. Studies that have used longitudinal data have provided less consistent support for a relationship between work–family conflict and depression. Specifically, using a 1-year time lag, Hammer et al. (in press) and Reifman et al. (1991) found no relationship between work–family conflict and depression. On the other hand, using a 4-year time lag, Frone et al. (1997) found that FIW related to depression at follow-up but that WIF did not. Two studies predicted clinically diagnosed depression rather than simply the extensiveness of depressive symptoms (Frone, 2000; Grzywacz & Bass, 2003). Both of these cross-sectional studies found positive relationships of WIF and FIW with depression that reached a level that was diagnosed as a clinical disorder. A sizeable number of studies examined relationships between work– family conflict and other aspects of psychological health such as anxiety, life distress, and psychological strain. As with depressive symptoms, studies that included measures of WIF and FIW have generally found that both directions of interference are associated with these other forms of psychological strain (Grandey & Cropanzano, 1999; Grzywacz & Bass, 2003; Jex & Elacqua, 1999; Kelloway, Gottlieb, & Barham, 1999; Leiter & Durup, 1996; MacEwen & Barling, 1994; Matsui, Oshawa, & Onglatco, 1995; Noor, 2004; O’Driscoll, Ilgen, & Hildreth, 1992; O’Driscoll, Poelmans, Spector, Kallieath, et al., 2003; Parasuraman, Purohit, Godshalk, & Beutell, 1996; Schieman et al., 2003). Other studies that have focused either exclusively on WIF (Matthews, Conger, & Wickrama, 1996; Parasuraman, Greenhaus, & Granrose, 1992; Parasuraman & Simmers, 2001; Small & Riley, 1990; Spector et al., 2004 or on bidirectional

Work–Family Conflict and Health

69

interference (Nelson, Quick, Hitt, & Moesel, 1990), have also yielded significant relationships between work–family conflict and psychological strain outcomes. In several studies, psychological and physiological health items were combined into a single measure using different construct labels such as burnout, psychophysical symptoms, and somatic-psychological health. Although the studies are relatively few in number, they demonstrate, once again, that each direction of interference, as well as bidirectional interference, bears a significant relationship with strain outcomes (Bacharach, Bamberger, & Conley, 1991; Drory & Shamir, 1988; Hammer, Saksvik, Nytro, Torvatn, & Bayaziet, 2004; Hughes & Galinsky, 1994; Kirchmeyer & Cohen, 1999) although two studies found significant relationships only for women (Aryee, 1993; Coverman, 1989). The literature also reveals consistent relationships between work–family conflict and low levels of overall life satisfaction (or, in several instances, low perceived quality of life). Most of the studies that included assessments of WIF and FIW found that both directions of interference were associated with diminished life satisfaction or quality of life (Carlson & Kacmar, 2000; Carlson et al., 2000; Greenhaus, Collins, & Shaw, 2003; Judge, Boudreau, & Bretz, 1994; Mallard & Lance, 1998; Netemeyer et al., 1996; Perrewe, Hochwarter, & Kiewitz, 1999; Wiley, 1987). As with the other indicators of psychological health, WIF and bidirectional interference were also associated with low life satisfaction or quality of life (Bedeian, Burke, & Moffett, 1988; Chiu, 1998; Duxbury & Higgins, 1991; Higgins & Duxbury, 1992; Kopelman, Greenhaus, & Connolly, 1983; Parasuraman, Greenhaus, Rabinowitz, Bedeian, & Mossholder, 1989; Rice, Frone, & McFarlin, 1992). Also noteworthy are the number of studies revealing that the impact of work–family conflict on life satisfaction was partially or fully mediated by satisfaction with the work and family domains (Aryee, Fields, & Luk, 1999; Bedeian et al., 1988; Duxbury & Higgins, 1991; Higgins & Duxbury, 1992; Kopelman et al., 1983). We return to these mediating effects when we present an integrated model of the health consequences of work– family conflict. In sum, work–family conflict is positively related to depression, anxiety, emotional strain, and indicators of combined emotional/physical symptoms and is negatively related to overall life satisfaction. Moreover, consistent with Frone’s (2003; see also Bellavia & Frone, 2005) observation, both directions of interference between work and family roles have an impact on overall psychological well-being.

70

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

Physical Health Research linking work–family conflict and physical health outcomes has taken two approaches. A small number of studies have assessed specific physical conditions such as blood pressure, hypertension, cholesterol level, the secretion of cortisol that reflects the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal response to stress, and of catecholamines such as epinephrine and norepinephrine that reflect the sympathetic nervous system’s reaction to stress. A larger number of studies have examined general self-reports of physical symptoms, somatic complaints, health complaints, and overall health problems. Physical Conditions Thomas and Ganster (1995) found that WIF and FIW were both positively related to diastolic blood pressure level, whereas Frone et al. (1997) found that FIW, but not WIF, was associated with hypertension. Thomas and Ganster (1995) also reported higher levels of cholesterol for individuals experiencing extensive WIF. The remaining studies predicting physical conditions did not directly assess work–family conflict but have implications for the impact of the work–family interface on physical health conditions. For example, Frankhaeuser, Lundberg, Fredrikson, and Melin (1989) found that male managers’ blood pressure and catecholamine output dropped sharply at 5 pm, whereas female managers’ blood pressure remained high and their norepinephrine secretion increased after work. Similarly, Lundberg and Frankhaeuser (1999) found that the elevation of norepinephrine after work was significantly greater for women than for men, especially for women with children. These findings suggest that elevated blood pressure and levels of norepinephrine may be due to the greater challenges faced by women than men (and mothers than women with no children) in juggling work and family demands. Goldstein, Shapiro, Chicz-DeMat, and Guthrie’s (1999) study of female nurses also provided indirect evidence of a linkage between work–family conflict and physical manifestations of health. They observed that married women had higher cortisol levels at night than did unmarried women. Moreover, unmarried women showed significant decreases in norepinephrine on off days as compared to work days, whereas married women had similar levels of norepinephrine on off days and work days. Goldstein et al. (1999) also found that decreases in heart rate from day time to evening were significantly greater for women without children than for women with children. In a similar vein, Brisson, Laflamme, and Moisan

Work–Family Conflict and Health

71

(1999) found that extensive family responsibilities, in conjunction with high job strain, produced high levels of systolic and diastolic blood pressure among white-collar women holding a university degree. In sum, these findings suggest a link between family responsibilities and physical health for women. It seems likely that the physical effects were due to the overload of trying to balance both work and home responsibilities.

Self-reports of Physical Health Problems Many of the studies predicted physical health problems from WIF and FIW. The overwhelming trend among these studies is that both directions of interference are associated with elevated physical health problems (Adams & Jex, 1999; Burke & Greenglass, 1999; Frone et al., 1996; Grandey & Cropanzano, 1999; Grzywacz, 2000; Judge et al., 1994; Klitzman, House, Israel, & Mero, 1990; Mallard & Lance, 1998; Netemeyer et al., 1996), although a few studies found a relationship for one direction of interference and not the other (Frone et al., 1997; Kinnunen & Mauno, 1998; Reifman et al., 1991). Not surprisingly, studies that examined only one direction of interference or bidirectional interference also reported positive relationships between work–family conflict and physical health problems (Cooke & Rousseau, 1984; Demeurouti, Bakker, & Bulters, 2004; Greenglass et al., 1989; Guelzow, Bird, & Koball, 1991; Jansen, Kant, Kristensen, & Nijhuis, 2003; Major et al., 2002; Nelson et al., 1990; Small & Riley, 1990; Spector et al., 2004; Thomas & Ganster, 1995).

Unhealthy Behaviors Given the potential impact of work–family conflict on physical health problems, it is not surprising that researchers have examined the relationship between conflict and behaviors that can produce health problems. Aggregating the findings across both directions of interference, work–family conflict has been associated with substance dependence (Frone, 2000), extensive use of medication (Burke & Greenglass, 1999), alcohol use (Frone, Barnes, & Farrell, 1994; Frone et al., 1996, 1997; Grzywacz & Marks, 2000; Vasse, Nijhuis, & Kok, 1998), and smoking (Frone et al., 1994). Work–family conflict, either assessed directly or inferred from extensive family responsibilities, has also been associated with limited exercise and poor food choices (Allen & Armstrong, 2005; Devine, Connors, Sobal, & Bisogni, 2003; Grzywacz & Marks, 2001; Nomaguchi & Bianchi, 2004).

72

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

A MODEL OF THE HEALTH CONSEQUENCES OF WORK–FAMILY CONFLICT Overview of the Model Fig. 1 depicts the process by which work–family conflict affects health outcomes. We believe that the effects of work–family conflict on health can best be understood in the larger context of stress. Work–family conflict has its roots in the study of organizational stress (Kahn et al., 1964) and has generally been considered from a stress perspective (Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1986). Moreover, the literature has often traced the origins of health and well-being to individuals’ reactions to stressful environments (Sanderson, 2004). The model proposes that extensive work demands and family demands produce two directions of work–family conflict: WIF and FIW. Moreover, personal and social resources (coping behaviors, social support, and personal characteristics) can reduce work–family conflict by decreasing work and family demands and can also attenuate the effects of work and family demands on work–family conflict. Both directions of conflict produce negative emotions and role dissatisfaction, and these effects are exacerbated when the role that is interfered with is highly salient to the individual and

High Salience and Standards Regarding Family Role

Personal and Social Resources

Family Dissatisfaction

Work Interference with Family

Family Demands

Negative Emotions

Unhealthy Behaviors

Life Dissatisfaction

Family Interference with Work

Work Demands

Work Dissatisfaction Personal and Social Resources

Fig. 1.

Poor Physical Health

High Salience and Standards Regarding Work Role

The Health Consequences of Work-Family Conflict.

Work–Family Conflict and Health

73

contains high standards for role performance. Negative emotions affect poor physical health directly through physiological processes and indirectly through unhealthy behaviors. Moreover, life dissatisfaction is directly affected by role dissatisfaction and is indirectly affected by negative emotions through role dissatisfaction and poor physical health. In subsequent sections, we review the conceptual and empirical bases for the various linkages in the model.1

The Antecedents of Work–Family Conflict The origin of work–family conflict resides in the work and family role demands placed on individuals by role senders or by themselves as selfsenders. As noted earlier, work–family conflict occurs when performance is inhibited in the work (family) role because of insufficient time or energy, strain symptoms, or inappropriate behaviors that are produced by demands and experiences in the family (work) role. Therefore, any role demand can potentially produce work–family conflict if it (a) limits the time or energy that can be devoted to the other role (b) produces strain that is subsequently carried over to the other role or (c) encourages the enactment of a behavior that is subsequently transferred to the other role as long as performance in the other role is negatively affected. Moreover, as discussed previously, it is generally believed that the demands that originate in a particular role are responsible for the interference of that role with the other role. That is, family demands are more likely to produce FIW, whereas work demands are more likely to produce WIF. Family demands that produce FIW include the presence of young children, the time devoted to family activities, psychological involvement in the family role, and a variety of stressors within the family domain, such as tension, interpersonal difficulties, conflict, and ambiguity (see Bellavia & Frone, 2005 and Frone, 2003 for excellent reviews of the antecedents of work–family conflict). These family demands potentially produce FIW because they affect the time or energy that can be devoted to work, the strain that is experienced at work, or the enactment of inappropriate behavior at work, all of which can inhibit job performance. Work demands that produce WIF include long work hours, inflexible work schedules, psychological involvement in work, and an array of workrelated stressors such as interpersonal conflict, job insecurity, role overload, role conflict, and role ambiguity (Bellavia & Frone, 2005; Frone, 2003). Again, these demands produce WIF because they affect the time or energy

74

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

that can be devoted to family, the strain that is experienced in the family domain, or the enactment of inappropriate behavior with family members, all of which can inhibit performance in the family role. Although work and family demands have the potential to produce WIF and FIW respectively, personal and social resources also play an important role in the process. The stress literature has emphasized the role of an individual’s appraisal of a situation as a determinant of the amount of stress that is experienced. Lazarus and his colleagues (Folkman & Lazarus, 1985; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Lazarus & Smith, 1988) have distinguished primary appraisals from secondary appraisals. Primary appraisals involve an individual’s evaluation of a situation as potentially threatening to his or her well-being. If a primary appraisal signals a threatening situation, a secondary appraisal activates personal and social resources to reduce the likelihood that the potentially stressful situation will actually inhibit one’s well-being. Personal and social resources have two different kinds of effects on work–family conflict. First, they can reduce work and family demands thereby reducing the resultant work–family conflict, a preventive function (Barrera, 1986; Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1994). Second, they can buffer or attenuate (Cohen & Wills, 1985) the impact of work and family demands on the level of work–family conflict an individual experiences. Each of these functions is a result of the process by which individuals appraise potentially stressful situations. For example, an individual may be subject to strong pressures from a manager to work on an important project on a Saturday afternoon during the same time as when his or her child’s birthday party is scheduled. The primary appraisal process is likely to convey to the employee that this situation will force a difficult choice between two important activities that will make someone (including the employee) disappointed or angry if one of the two activities is missed. The result of the primary appraisal may encourage the individual to determine how his or her resources can ward off the interference, a secondary appraisal. The individual may seek to restructure or redefine the demands of a role in that specific situation (Hall, 1972) by attempting to reschedule the work meeting or the birthday party (Powell & Greenhaus, 2005), an example of problem-focused coping (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). If either activity is successfully rescheduled, the individual is able to participate fully in both activities and avoid work–family interference. Alternatively, the individual may ask a colleague to replace him or her at the meeting (tangible support) or may seek permission from a spouse or child (emotional support) to leave

Work–Family Conflict and Health

75

the party a little early (after the cake has been cut) so that it would be possible to participate in an important portion of the business meeting. These instances illustrate the preventive role of coping and social support because the actions reduce or modify work and/or family pressures so that the potential interference does not occur or is significantly reduced. Coping and social support can also be used to reduce or modify work or family demands on an ongoing basis so that episodes of potential interference are less likely to occur in the future. For example, supportive supervisors may consult individuals before scheduling a meeting that is outside of normal work hours or may decide not to schedule meetings early in the morning when parents are responsible for transporting their children to school. Organizations may also encourage teams to redesign their job duties so that work goals can be met in a way that does not interfere regularly with family or personal activities (Bailyn, 1993). Supportive role senders in the work and family domains can also reduce role demands by providing tangible support such as a supervisor hiring more staff so that the individual’s work role overload subsides and a spouse spending additional time with the children so that an individual’s time demands at home are less severe. Emotional and informational support can also reduce ongoing role demands as when a colleague recommends a more flexible daycare provider who reduces the time pressures and stress that impinge on an individual and subsequently reduces interference between family and work roles. Direct support for the preventive function of social support has been provided by Viswesvaran, Sanchez, and Fisher’s (1999) meta-analysis, which documented negative relationships between social support and work-related stressors (work role demands in our terminology). Indirect evidence is revealed through negative relationships between support and work–family conflict, which has been widely observed in the literature. Employees who work for supportive supervisors and who work in organizations with supportive work cultures experience lower level of work–family conflict than those who are employed in less supportive work places (Allen, 2001; Anderson, Coffey, & Byerly, 2002; Batt & Valcour, 2003; Behson, 2005; Thomas & Ganster, 1995; Thompson, Beauvais, & Lyness, 1999). Similarly, individuals with supportive spouses experience lower levels of work–family conflict than those who have unsupportive spouses (Adams, King, & King, 1996; Frone et al., 1997; Fu & Shaffer, 2001; Grzywacz & Marks, 2000). Coping strategies can also reduce work–family conflict through their impact on work or family role demands. Employees can use problem-focused coping strategies (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984) such as negotiating with role

76

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

senders to relieve the time pressures or the amount of stress within a role that can subsequently reduce work–family conflict. Consistent with this assertion, negative relationships between active, direct, or problem-focused coping and work–family conflict have been observed in the literature (Aryee, Luk, Leung, & Lo, 1999; Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1991; Rotundo, Carlson, & Kincaid, 2003). The impact of active coping strategies on reducing work–family conflict is further supported by the selection, optimization, and compensation (SOC) model of adaptive behavior (Wiese, Freund, & Baltes, 2002). This model specifies goals, strategies to accomplish goals, and techniques to overcome obstacles as mechanisms that contribute to successful life management. Baltes and Heydens-Gahir (2003) have demonstrated that individuals who engage in SOC behaviors experience low levels of job and family stressors, which in turn, produce low levels of WIF and FIW. Time management, another self-management coping strategy, has also been shown to reduce work–family conflict (Adams & Jex, 1999). It is also possible that certain dispositional characteristics play a preventive role in work–family conflict. For example, individuals high on agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, hardiness, and a secure relationship style have been found to experience relatively low levels of work–family conflict (Bernas & Major, 2002; Bruck & Allen, 2003; Grzywacz & Marks, 2000; Sumer & Knight, 2001; Wayne, Musisca, & Fleeson, 2004). It is possible that these personal resources enable individuals to employ active coping strategies or to seek social support from role senders both of which can reduce work–family conflict. Proposition 1. The availability and use of personal and social resources have negative indirect effects on WIF and FIW. Social support, active coping, and positive dispositional characteristics reduce work and family role demands, which, in turn, reduce work–family conflict. In addition to their preventive function, social support and coping can moderate relationships between external demands arising in the work and family domains and work–family conflict. In these instances of buffering, support and coping do not reduce the external pressures on an individual but rather soften (or eliminate) their impact on interference. Individuals who realize that family induced tension has made it difficult for them to concentrate at work and fulfill their work requirements might seek informational or emotional support from a colleague, family member, or professional counselor, thereby reducing the likelihood that job performance will suffer. Individuals’ use of a self-leadership technique like positive selftalk (Manz & Neck, 2004) can enable them to perceive a stressful situation

Work–Family Conflict and Health

77

as a challenge rather than as a threat, thereby experiencing fewer strain symptoms that can potentially be transferred to the family domain. The research that has examined the buffering effects of social support or coping in the context of the work–family interface has produced inconsistent results. However, these studies have typically examined the moderating effect of support or coping on relationships between work–family conflict and strain outcomes (Brough & O’Driscoll, 2005; Viswesvaran, et al., 1999). We position these social and personal resources earlier in the process as factors that determine whether environmental pressures produce work– family conflict, and the literature provides some support for this mechanism, at least with regard to social support. For example, a high level of supervisory support has been found to attenuate the impact of work hours (Fox & Dwyer, 1999) and conflict within the work role (Fu & Shaffer, 2001) on work–family conflict. Similarly, a high level of support from one’s spouse has been found to attenuate the impact of parental demands (Aryee, Fields, & Luk, 1999; Matsui et al., 1995) and work hours (Noor, 2002) on work–family conflict. Proposition 2. the relationships of work demands and family demands with WIF and FIW respectively are moderated by the availability and use of personal and social resources, such that the relationships are weaker with extensive resources than with limited resources. The Impact of Work–Family Conflict on Negative Emotions and Role Dissatisfaction As discussed earlier, extensive work–family conflict has been associated with a variety of physical health problems and life dissatisfaction. Our model indicates that negative emotions, and to a lesser extent role dissatisfaction, are key variables that mediate the effects of work–family conflict on these outcomes. Negative emotions include anger, anxiety, depression, frustration, and resentment. Given the central role that negative emotions play in our model, before further elaboration of the model, we first provide a brief background on the study of emotions. Moods and emotions are both considered affective states (Weiss, 2002). In contrast to moods, emotions are generally associated with specific events or occurrences and are powerful enough to interrupt thought processes (Brief & Weiss, 2002). Although the study of emotions has long been a topic of inquiry in psychology, it is only recently that it has received substantial attention by organizational psychologists (Brief, 2001). Factors in the

78

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

workplace that have been related to emotions include workplace stressors, leadership behaviors, workgroup characteristics, physical settings, and organizational citizenship behavior, counterproductive work behavior, and organizational rewards and punishments (e.g., Brief & Weiss; Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001). For example, workplace stress research generally suggests that individuals monitor and appraise the environment. This cognitive appraisal of the environment determines whether the emotion that is aroused is positive or negative as well as the particular emotion (Weiss, 2002). When events occur that are perceived as threats to individual well-being (e.g., interpersonal conflict), a negative emotional response can result (Spector, 1998). Negative emotion is key to our model which is believed to be the immediate psychological pathway through which psychosocial factors influence health (Feldman et al., 1999). Although emotion serves a functional purpose in that it energizes adaptive behavior, continued exposure to events that induce negative emotions can impair individual physical health through excessive stimulation of both the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal and sympathetic–adrenal–adrenocortical systems (e.g., Cohen & Rodriguez, 1995; Frankenhauser et al., 1989). Accordingly, it is not surprising that research has revealed consistent positive relationships between both directions of work–family conflict and depression, anxiety, psychological strain, and life distress. However, why work–family conflict produces these effects has not been systematically addressed. By definition, work–family conflict reflects inhibited role performance; WIF represents depressed performance in the family domain because of demands arising at work and FIW represents restricted performance at work because of demands arising in the family role. We believe that the inhibited role performance inherent in work–family conflict produces negative emotions in large part because it thwarts the accomplishment of family and work goals and the attainment of values. For example, poor job performance yields fewer rewards (Porter & Lawler, 1968), which in turn produce discrepancies between desired outcomes and received outcomes. These discrepancies may involve intrinsic outcomes (feelings of accomplishment, recognition for achievements) and extrinsic outcomes (salary increases, feelings of job security). We suggest that the shortfall of intrinsic and extrinsic outcomes in comparison to desired levels brought on by performance decrements produces negative emotions. Consistent with this view, low job performance has been associated with high levels of work anxiety (Spector, Dwyer, & Jex, 1988), and organizational constraints that can interfere with effective job performance have also been related to such negative emotions as anxiety, frustration, and anger (Chen &

Work–Family Conflict and Health

79

Spector, 1991; Fox et al., 2001; Spector & Jex, 1998; Spector et al., 1988). In short, we propose that the discrepancies between values and outcomes due to inhibited performance inherent in work–family conflict trigger a range of negative emotions. As we discuss shortly, these negative emotions produce a variety of physical health problems and diminished life satisfaction. The literature also provides strong support for a negative relationship between work–family conflict and role satisfaction; in particular WIF heightens feelings of dissatisfaction with the family role and FIW produces feelings of dissatisfaction with the work role (Frone, 2003). Fig. 1 indicates that work–family conflict has direct and indirect effects on role dissatisfaction. Regarding the direct effect, the reduced role performance and its attendant reduction in rewards described earlier is likely to reduce satisfaction with the role. Job satisfaction is thought to be a function of the correspondence between outcomes and values (Locke, 1976); the greater the discrepancy between outcomes and values, the greater the dissatisfaction. Perrewe´ et al. (1999) found that value attainment partially mediated the relationship between work–family conflict and job satisfaction; that is, work–family conflict was associated with diminished value attainment, which was associated with low levels of job satisfaction. It is reasonable to expect that a similar process operates in the family domain to produce dissatisfaction with the family role. The indirect effect of work–family conflict on role dissatisfaction is mediated by negative emotions. Quite apart from the diminished rewards associated with work–family conflict, we believe that such negative emotions as depression, anxiety, and anger can sour one’s experiences in the role that is interfered with as well as in the role that produced the interference. This might occur because continued experience of negative emotion in either the family or work setting may over time adversely affect feelings of satisfaction in that setting. In other words if one frequently experiences anger or frustration at work because of interference with desired family activities, being at work may become aversive and work satisfaction would decline. Several studies have found that a variety of negative emotions, including anger and frustration, are related to job dissatisfaction (Chen & Spector, 1991; Spector et al., 1988; Van Katwyk, Fox, Spector, & Kelloway, 2000). Again, we would expect a similar process to operate in the family domain. Therefore: Proposition 3. WIF and FIW have direct effects on negative emotions. Proposition 4. WIF and FIW have direct effects on role dissatisfaction and indirect effects through negative emotions.

80

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

Although Propositions 3 and 4 posit effects of work–family conflict on negative emotions and role dissatisfaction respectively, Fig. 1 also indicates that these effects are moderated by the salience of the role that is interfered with and the performance standards associated with this role. We propose that the performance decrement and diminished outcomes associated with work–family conflict have a particularly strong effect on negative emotions and role dissatisfaction when the role that suffers diminished performance (the interfered-with role) is highly salient to the individual. According to social identity theory, social roles such as work and family form the basis of a person’s self-identity (Burke, 1991; Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1995), and the effectiveness of role performance has consequences for one’s self-evaluation (Thoits, 1991). Individuals who participate in a variety of social roles have multiple identities (Lobel, 1991) that are organized in a hierarchy of centrality (Thoits, 1991). Moreover, ‘‘the more salient the role identity, the more meaning, purpose, and behavioral guidance the individual should derive from its enactment, and thus, the more that identity should influence psychological well-being’’ (Thoits, 1991, pp. 105–106). Thoits suggests that negative role experiences are more psychologically damaging when they threaten one’s identity in highly salient roles than when they threaten one’s identity in less salient roles. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that diminished performance and outcomes in a role are more likely to provoke negative emotions and produce dissatisfaction when the role is highly salient than when it is not. Beatty (1996) found that the relationships of work–family conflict with depression and anxiety were stronger for women who have a child than for women who do not. This finding provides indirect support for the moderating effect of role salience if it is assumed that the presence of a child increases the salience of the family role. MacEwen and Barling’s (1994) finding that WIF was a stronger predictor of depression than FIW for women, whereas FIW was a stronger predictor of depression than WIF for men is consistent with our expectation to the extent that the family role is more salient to women (Friedman & Greenhaus, 2000) and the work role is more salient to men (Greenhaus, Parasuraman, Granrose, Rabinowitz, & Beutell, 1989). The stronger relationships of FIW with anxiety (Frone, 2000) and heavy alcohol use (Frone et al., 1996) for men than for women is also consistent with our expectation, once again if the work role is more salient to men than to women. Proposition 5. The relationships of WIF and FIW with negative emotions and role dissatisfaction are moderated by the salience of the

Work–Family Conflict and Health

81

interfered-with role such that the relationships are stronger when the role is highly salient than when it is not highly salient. Our model also indicates that high performance standards in the role that is interfered with exacerbate the relationships of work–family conflict with negative emotions and role dissatisfaction. Our rationale is that diminished performance in a role is most likely to be disturbing (that is, produce negative emotions) and dissatisfying when the role’s culture emphasizes and expects high performance. When performance expectations are high, a drop in performance is likely to bring reduced rewards or even punishment, which should provoke negative emotions and role dissatisfaction. Schieman et al. (2003) found that the relationship between FIW and anxiety was stronger for men who occupy jobs with high autonomy than for those whose jobs have low autonomy. The authors suggest that, ‘‘work organizations that allow individuals more autonomy may place more responsibilities on, and greater trust in, individuals. If they expect more in return, then they might also be less tolerant of outside distractions’’ (Schieman et al., 2003, p. 155). Proposition 6. The relationships of WIF and FIW with negative emotions and role dissatisfaction are moderated by performance standards in the interfered-with role, such that the relationships are stronger when performance standards are high than when they are low. The Consequences of Negative Emotions and Role Dissatisfaction Research indicates that negative emotions bear a relationship to physical health. For example, such negative emotions as depression, anxiety, anger, and frustration have been associated with self-reported health problems (Chen & Spector, 1991; Spector et al., 1988; Spector & Jex, 1998), and negative emotions may also play a role in cardiovascular disease (Greenglass, 1996; Julkunen, 1996; Lovallo, 1997) and immune system functioning (Lovallo, 1997). As described by Jones and Bright (2001), much of the explanation for the connection between emotion and physical health concerns the body’s physiological response to stress. Events that are perceived as stressful elicit negative emotions and certain central nervous system activity that affects the physiology. For example, under stress and emotion an individual’s system will secrete cortisol, epinephrine, and norepinephrine into the blood stream to prepare the body for physical challenge, such as fight or flight. In modern society, responses to emotion and stress rarely involve extreme physical activity, so the circulatory system is left with a variety of compounds in the blood that are not consumed. Over

82

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

time this can lead to a variety of physical health problems, such as cardiovascular disease. In addition, negative emotions may indirectly affect physical health through their effect on unhealthy behaviors (Ng & Jeffery, 2003) that produce health problems (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2000). Although there are some inconsistencies in the literature, psychological stress has been associated with such behaviors as unhealthy food choices, infrequent physical exercise, alcohol consumption, and tobacco use (Aldana, Sutton, Jacobson, & Quirk, 1996; Hellerstedt & Jeffery, 1997; Ng & Jeffery, 2003; Pak, Olsen, & Mahoney, 2000; Steffy & Laker, 1991). Ng and Jeffery (2003) explain these relationships in terms of the tendency of individuals experiencing aversive states like stress to self-manage their moods by engaging in unhealthy behaviors that are pleasurable. Proposition 7. Negative emotions have direct effects on poor physical health and have indirect effects through unhealthy behaviors. Our model also specifies that negative emotions are related to life dissatisfaction. One explanation for the relationship lies in the role that physical health problems can play in life dissatisfaction. In their review of the literature on subjective well-being, Diener, Suh, Lucas, and Smith (1999) observed that subjective well-being is likely to be affected by subjectively interpreted health rather than by objective indicators of health. They also noted that individuals with multiple or disabling health problems experienced lower life satisfaction than individuals without these conditions. Therefore, although there is no simple linear relationship between physical health and life dissatisfaction, individuals’ negative interpretations of their health and their accumulation of serious physical problems do seem to contribute to life dissatisfaction. A second explanation for the effect of negative emotions on life dissatisfaction hinges on the dissatisfaction with work and family roles that is produced by negative emotions. Research has consistently shown that work dissatisfaction and family dissatisfaction contribute to overall life dissatisfaction (Aryee et al., 1999; Bedeian et al., 1988; Carlson & Kacmar, 2000; Coverman, 1989; Duxbury & Higgins, 1991; Kopelman et al., 1983; Rice et al., 1992). An additive perspective on the overall quality of life posits that an evaluation of one’s life is based on a consideration of the satisfactions derived from specific life domains (Rice et al., 1992). Because the work and family domains are important in most people’s lives, dissatisfaction with these roles promotes dissatisfaction with one’s overall life.

Work–Family Conflict and Health

83

Proposition 8. Negative emotions have indirect effects on life dissatisfaction through poor physical health and role dissatisfaction.

AN AGENDA FOR FUTURE RESEARCH The literature provides substantial support for relationships between work–family conflict and health and well-being. Our model proposes a process by which work–family conflict results in poor health. Negative emotions play a major role in this process because they mediate relationships between conflict and physical health. The model also highlights the preventive and buffering effects of personal and social resources on work– family conflict, and predicts that the impact of conflict on psychological and physical health is dependent upon the salience of work and family roles and the performance standards associated with each role. The model is intended to stimulate and guide future research. To help achieve these goals, we have identified a number of directions for future research. First, however, it is important to reflect on the meaning of work– family conflict and how different interpretations of work–family conflict can affect theory and research in this area. We defined work–family conflict as the extent to which experiences in one role result in diminished performance in the other role. This definition is consistent with Greenhaus and Beutell’s (1985) assertion that conflict exists when a pressures or demands arising from one role make it difficult to fulfill requirements of another role, and is also consistent with Edwards and Rothbard’s (2000) belief that role performance must suffer for conflict or interference to occur. In fact, the theoretical basis for our model’s proposed linkages between work–family conflict and negative emotions and role dissatisfaction rests on the discrepancies between values and outcomes that are produced by restricted performance in the role subject to interference. However, there are situations in which demands from one role make it difficult but not impossible to meet the requirements of the other role, thereby not inhibiting performance in the latter role. For example, an employee’s manager may call an emergency evening meeting when it is the employee’s day to carpool the children to soccer practice. After four or five telephone calls, the individual is able to find another parent who can switch carpool days thus avoiding a decrement in performance in either domain. As another example, an individual confronted with substantial work and family demands may push himself or herself to maintain performance by giving up sleep or exercise to make more time for the two roles. Although neither of

84

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

these examples fits our definition of work–family conflict because role performance is unaffected, both situations pose a challenge to individuals who are juggling multiple roles. Whether these situations constitute work–family conflict is one question. Another is whether these ‘‘manageable’’ difficulties in meeting role demands have negative health consequences. In the first example, it is plausible that multiple efforts to find a substitute carpooler over repeated occasions can produce embarrassment, anger, or resentment because seeking support in this situation may imply dependence on others and the need to reciprocate at some time in the future. The individual in the second example who continually sacrifices sleep or exercise to maintain role performance is also likely to pay an emotional and physical price. Therefore, we encourage researchers to consider whether situations that involve meeting multiple role demands through Herculean effort reflect work–family conflict. If they do, scales designed to assess work–family conflict must include items that tap this condition. Second, if it is decided that these kinds of situations fall outside the boundary of work–family conflict, it is still important to measure this phenomenon (because it is likely a frequent occurrence) and examine whether it has negative consequences for health and well-being. Even if active coping and social support prevent deteriorations in role performance thereby reducing the incidence of work– family conflict, they may still create negative emotions that ultimately affect physical health. Future research should examine the conditions under which coping and social support have negative consequences for health and wellbeing. The necessity of including diminished performance in the definition of work–family conflict raises a broader question regarding the meaning of role performance. Although job performance is usually defined against external standards (e.g., job descriptions, hierarchically set goals), individuals have aspirations that determine whether their performance produces feelings of psychological success (Hall, 1976). If an individual’s family responsibilities do not restrict job performance in the organization’s eyes but cause performance to drop below one’s level of aspiration, has the family interfered with work? Similarly, if a parent frequently takes the children to fast food restaurants because his or her work schedule does not leave time to cook, is that a decrement in family performance if the parent feels guilty, but the children relish the food? In short, the way an individual perceives the requirements of a role is likely to determine whether the individual believes that cross-role interference has occurred. Research should determine whether the impact of role

Work–Family Conflict and Health

85

interference on health and well-being varies depending on whether role performance deviates from external standards or internal standards. Because so few studies have been conducted on the different types of work–family conflict (time, energy, strain, behavior), it is difficult to draw conclusions regarding their relative effects on health and well-being. Future research should examine their additive and interactive effects to determine whether some combinations of conflict (e.g., time and strain) produce more health problems than other types. It is also important to determine whether the types of conflict produce different negative emotions. For example, is time-based conflict more likely to produce frustration and strain-based conflict depression? Additional research is also needed to determine the impact of the two directions of conflict on health outcomes. Work–family conflict tends to produce more dissatisfaction in the role that is subject to the interference than in the role that causes the interference (Frone, 2003). Nevertheless, the literature generally indicates that both directions of conflict are associated with negative emotions, physical health, and life dissatisfaction. This inconsistency implies that negative emotions have a stronger impact than role dissatisfaction on physical health and dissatisfaction with life in general, an implication that can be empirically tested. Moreover, we proposed that role salience and performance standards moderate the relationships of work–family conflict with role dissatisfaction and negative emotions. Therefore, differential effects of WIF and FIW on health outcomes could be explained by the relative salience of work and family roles and the extent to which performance standards are more explicit or more stringent in one role than the other. Additional research should determine the conditions under which the different directions of conflict influence negative emotions and the other health outcomes. We also predicted that personal and social resources have a preventive function by reducing work and family demands and subsequent work– family conflict as well as a buffering function by attenuating the impact of work and family demands on work–family conflict. Although the literature provides some support for both functions, additional research is required to gain more insight into the role of resources in the work–family conflict process. Stress researchers have proposed that the source and type of social support should ‘‘match’’ the type of stress that is experienced and the coping requirements of the particular situation (Cohen & Syme, 1985; Cohen & Wills, 1985; Cutrona & Russell, 1990; Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1994). In the context of work–family conflict, must there be a match between the source of support (work and family) and the direction of interference (WIF

86

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

and FIW) or between the type of support (instrumental, emotional, informational, appraisal) and the type of work–family conflict (time, energy, strain, behavior)? Similar questions can be raised about the effectiveness of specific coping techniques. Hall (1972) has distinguished three coping strategies for dealing with work–family conflict – structural role redefinition, role reorientation, and reactive role behavior – where the first type reflects problem-focused coping (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984) and the latter two types represent emotion-focused coping. Although structural role redefinition is generally thought to be the most effective coping strategy because it attempts to reduce environmental pressures, additional research is required to determine whether different types or directions of work–family conflict can be managed more effectively with different coping strategies (Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1994). It is also important to understand the relationship between dispositional characteristics and the utilization and effectiveness of coping resources. We noted earlier that agreeable, conscientious, extraverted, and hardy individuals, as well as those with a secure relationship style, experience low levels of work–family conflict (Bernas & Major, 2002; Bruck & Allen, 2003; Grzywacz & Marks, 2000; Sumer & Knight, 2001; Wayne et al., 2004). Conversely, individuals characterized by high negative affectivity experience high levels of work–family conflict (Stoeva, Chiu, & Greenhaus, 2002). Future research should determine whether coping strategies and social support mediate the effects of these dispositional variables on work–family conflict. Although our model focused on the impact of work–family conflict on individual health and well-being, it is important to consider the consequences of conflict for the health of the family. Crossover generally refers to the process by which stress or strain arising at work affects the strain experienced by another person in the home environment (Westman, 1991, 2001; Westman & Etzion, 1995; Westman & Vinokur, 1998; Westman, Vinokur, Hamilton, & Roziner, 2004). Several studies have shown that the work–family conflict of one member of a couple relates to work–family conflict of the other member of the couple (Hammer, Allen, & Grigsby, 1997; Hammer, Bauer, & Grandey, 2003). In addition, parental work– family conflict has been associated with children’s behavioral problems (Stewart & Barling, 1996; Voydanoff, 2004). These studies suggest that investigations are needed to determine how the work–family conflict of one family member directly and indirectly relates to the health of his or her spouse and children. For example, chronic WIF may result in partner marital dissatisfaction and psychological strain. Moreover,

Work–Family Conflict and Health

87

when one partner frequently experiences WIF, the other partner may be left to pick-up the slack at home and in turn engage in unhealthy behaviors as a form of stress relief (e.g., alcohol or tobacco use). Parents who do not feel that they have time to engage in healthy behaviors such as exercise may unwittingly role model these behaviors, resulting in less physical activity among their children. These are just a few examples of the many potential ways by which work–family conflict experienced by one family member may impact the health of other family members. Although the focus of this chapter has been on work–family conflict, it is important to examine the effect of work–family enrichment on health and well-being. Work–family enrichment refers to the extent to which experiences in one role enhance performance and positive affect in the other role (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). Because conflict and enrichment are only modestly related to each other (Frone, 2003), the effects of conflict and enrichment on health may not simply be the mirror image of one another. Although there is evidence that work–family enrichment is positively associated with physical and mental health (Grzywacz, 2000), further research is necessary to understand why enrichment affects health and to identify the conditions that strengthen and weaken the enrichment–health relationships. In order to advance theory on the health consequences of the work– family interface, researchers should employ a wider range of methodologies than are typically used at the present time. The vast majority of the studies reported in this chapter have used cross-sectional designs, often with all variables assessed via self-report questionnaire. Although from a theoretical perspective work–family conflict is a likely cause of health, the evidence from most studies is merely consistent with this idea and does not provide particularly strong support. Research employing longitudinal designs is required to examine the causal connections among the health outcomes. For example, although our model posits that poor physical health can promote life dissatisfaction, it is also possible that individuals who are dissatisfied with their lives engage in unhealthy behaviors that subsequently affect physical health. Moreover, health-related behaviors can have an effect on negative emotions, as suggested by research linking physical exercise to decreased levels of depression (Blumenthal et al., 1999). In addition, longitudinal studies can detect feedback loops between health outcomes and causally prior variables in the model. For example, an individual’s depressed state may discourage others from providing the individual with social support, or the quality of social support may be poor (Sacco & Dunn, 1990). Additionally, poor physical health may deprive an individual of the energy and vigor to use active coping strategies.

88

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

Because most of the existing research relies too heavily on cross-sectional data laden with single-source, self-report measures of attitudes and feelings, it would be useful to use pre-test post-test designs with more objective data to examine the impact of events that affect work demands (e.g., getting a promotion or a new job that increases or decreases the level of responsibilities or that requires more or less travel) and family demands (e.g., having a first child, losing a spouse but retaining custody of children). Tracking individuals over time with multiple measures of work and family demands, work–family conflict, and health outcomes can help us draw more confident causal conclusions. As noted earlier, most of the research has examined relationships between ongoing or chronic work–family conflict and health outcomes. To provide a fuller understanding of the connection between work–family conflict and health, we suggest that research also examine the impact of specific work– family conflict episodes on health and well-being. How severe must an episode of work–family conflict be before it produces negative emotions? As the number of work–family conflict episodes within a given time period increase, do increases in negative emotions plateau or increase exponentially? Several types of research designs can be used to examine these questions. A critical incident approach can direct individuals to think back to a time when they were faced with a potential conflict between a work activity and a family activity (Powell & Greenhaus, 2005). The utilization of social support and other coping resources, the resolution of the potential conflict, and the effect of this episode on negative emotions and role dissatisfaction can then be assessed to determine the conditions under which a single instance of work–family conflict affects health outcomes. Questions regarding repeated similar episodes can also be asked to determine the number of episodes that make one vulnerable to negative health consequences. Another method that could be further utilized by work–family researchers is experience sampling (Williams & Alliger, 1994; Williams, Suls, Alliger, Learner, & Wan, 1991), particularly as a way to examine physiological reactions to episodes of work–family conflict. For example, participants could be asked to complete a daily diary cataloging work–family conflicts experienced during the day. Additionally, cortisol samples could be collected at several daily intervals (e.g., immediately upon waking, one-hour after returning home from work) and/or an ambulatory blood pressure monitor could be worn to assess cardiovascular activity. Such a strategy would allow researchers to examine within-person, day-to-day associations between work–family conflicts and physiological indicators of health. Moreover, by

Work–Family Conflict and Health

89

tracking specific work–family conflict episodes or events along with daily physiological monitoring, this method may also provide insights into the types of work–family conflicts individuals find most stressful. In summary, we encourage researchers to use a variety of methodologies to advance theory regarding the health consequences of work–family conflict. With more individuals juggling work and family responsibilities in an increasingly competitive work environment, a more complete understanding of the impact of the work–family interface on health outcomes is essential to develop initiatives that can promote individual and family well-being.

NOTES 1. The direct effects of role demands and personal and social resources on health are not included in the model because these effects do not operate through work–family conflict.

REFERENCES Adams, G. A., & Jex, S. M. (1999). Relationships between time management, control, work– family conflict, and strain. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 72–77. Adams, G. A., King, L. A., & King, D. W. (1996). Relationships of job and family involvement, family social support, and work–family conflict with job and life satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 411–420. Aldana, S. G., Sutton, L. D., Jacobson, B. H., & Quirk, M. G. (1996). Relationships between leisure time physical activity and perceived stress. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 82, 315–321. Allen, T. D. (2001). Family supportive work environments: The role of organizational perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 414–435. Allen, T. D. & Armstrong, J. (in press, 2005). Further examination of the link between work– family conflict and physical health: The role of health-related behaviors. American Behavioral Scientist. Allen, T. D., Herst, D. E. L., Bruck, C. S., & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences associated with work-to-family conflict: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 278–308. Anderson, S., Coffey, B. S., & Byerly, R. T. (2002). Formal organizational initiatives and informal workplace practices: Links to work–family conflict and job-related outcomes. Journal of Management, 28, 787–810. Aryee, S. (1993). Dual-earner couples in Singapore: An examination of work and nonwork sources of their experienced burnout. Human Relations, 46, 1441–1468. Aryee, S., Fields, D., & Luk, V. (1999). A cross-cultural test of a model of the work–family interface. Journal of Management, 25, 491–511. Aryee, S., Luk, V., Leung, A., & Lo, S. (1999). Role stressors, interrole conflict, and well-being: The moderating influence of spousal support and coping behaviors among employed parents in Hong Kong. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 259–278.

90

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E., & Fugate, M. (2000). All in a day’s work: Boundaries and micro role transitions. Academy of Management Review, 25, 472–491. Bacharach, S. B., Bamberger, P., & Conley, S. (1991). Work–home conflict among nurses and engineers: Mediating impact of role stress on burnout and satisfaction at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12, 39–53. Bailyn, L. (1993). Breaking the mold: Women, men, and time in the new corporate world. New York: Free Press. Baltes, B. B., & Heydens-Gahir, H. A. (2003). Reduction of work–family conflict through the use of selection, optimization, and compensation behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1005–1018. Barling, J., & Sorensen, D. (1997). Work and family: In search of a relevant research agenda. In: C. L. Cooper & S. E. Jackson (Eds), Creating tomorrow’s organizations (pp. 157–169). New York: Wiley. Barnett, R. C. (1998). Toward a review and reconceptualization of the work/family literature. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 124, 125–182. Barnett, R. C. (1999). A new work-life model for the twenty-first century. ANNALS, AAPSS, 562, 143–158. Barnett, R. C., & Hyde, J. S. (2001). Women, men, work, and family. American Psychologist, 56, 781–796. Barrera, M. (1986). Distinctions between social support concepts, measures, and models. American Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 413–445. Batt, R., & Valcour, P. M. (2003). Human resource practices as predictors of work–family outcomes and employee turnover. Industrial Relations, 42, 189–220. Beatty, C. A. (1996). The stress of managerial and professional women: Is the price too high? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 233–251. Bedeian, A. G., Burke, B. G., & Moffett, R. G. (1988). Outcomes of work–family conflict among married male and female professionals. Journal of Management, 14, 475–491. Behson, S. J. (2005). The relative contribution of formal and informal organizational work– family support. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 487–500. Bellavia, G., & Frone, M. R. (2005). Work–family conflict. In: J. Barling, E. K. Kelloway & M. R. Frone (Eds), Handbook of work stress (pp. 143–162). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bernas, K. H., & Major, D. A. (2002). Contributors to stress resistance: Testing a model of women’s work–family conflict. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 170–178. Blumenthal, J. A., Babyak, M. A., Moore, K. A., Craighead, W. E., Herman, S., Katri, P., et al. (1999). Effects of exercise training on older patients with major depression. Archives of Internal Medicine, 159, 2349–2356. Brett, J. M., & Stroh, L. K. (2003). Working 61 plus hours a week: Why do managers do it? Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 67–78. Brief, A. P. (2001). Organizational behavior and the study of affect: Keep your eyes on the organization. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 131–139. Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2002). Organizational behavior: Affect in the workplace. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 279–307. Brisson, C., Laflamme, N., & Moisan, J. (1999). Effect of family responsibilities and job strain on ambulatory blood pressure among white-collar women. Psychosomatic Medicine, 61, 205–213.

Work–Family Conflict and Health

91

Brough, P., & O’Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Work–family conflict and stress. In: A.-S. Antoniou & C. L. Cooper (Eds), Research companion to organizational health psychology (pp. 346–365). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Bruck, C. S., & Allen, T. D. (2003). The relationship between big five personality traits, negative affectivity, type A behavior, and work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 457–472. Burke, P. J. (1991). Identity processes and social stress. American Sociological Review, 56, 836–849. Burke, R. J., & Greenglass, E. R. (1999). Work–family conflict, spouse support, and nursing staff well-being during organizational restructuring. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 327–336. Carlson, D. S., & Kacmar, K. M. (2000). Work–family conflict in the organization: Do life role values make a difference? Journal of Management, 26, 1031–1054. Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K. M., & Williams, L. J. (2000). Construction and initial validation of a multidimensional measure of work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 249–276. Chen, P. Y., & Spector, P. E. (1991). Negative affectivity as the underlying cause of correlations between stressors and strains. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 398–407. Chiu, R. K. (1998). Relationships among role conflicts, role satisfactions, and life satisfaction: Evidence from Hong Kong. Social Behavior and Personality, 26, 409–414. Clark, S. C. (2002). Communicating across the work/home border. Community, Work & Family, 5, 23–48. Cohen, S., & Rodriguez, M. S. (1995). Pathways linking affective disturbances and physical disorders. Health Psychology, 14, 374–380. Cohen, S., & Syme, S. L. (1985). Issues in the study and application of social support. In: S. Cohen & S. L. Syme (Eds), Social support and health (pp. 3–22). Orlando, FL: Academic Press. Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310–357. Cooke, R. A., & Rousseau, D. M. (1984). Stress and strain from family roles and work-role expectations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 252–260. Coverman, S. (1989). Role overload, role conflict, and stress: Addressing consequences of multiple role demands. Social Forces, 67, 965–982. Cutrona, C. E., & Russell, D. W. (1990). Type of social support and specific stress: Toward a theory of optimal matching. In: B. R. Sarason, I. G. Sarason & G. R. Pierce (Eds), Social support: An interactional view (pp. 319–366). New York: Wiley. Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., & Bulters, A. J. (2004). The loss spiral of work pressure, work–home interference and exhaustion: Reciprocal relations in a three-wave study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 131–149. Devine, C. M., Connors, M. M., Sobal, J., & Bisogni, C. A. (2003). Sandwiching it in: Spillover of work onto food choices and family roles in low- and moderate-income urban households. Social Science & Medicine, 56, 617–630. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302. Drory, A., & Shamir, B. (1988). Effects of organizational and life variables on job satisfaction and burnout. Group & Organization Studies, 13, 441–455. Duxbury, L. E., & Higgins, C. A. (1991). Gender differences in work–family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 60–74.

92

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

Eby, L. T., Casper, W. J., Lockwood, A., Bordeaux, C., & Brinley, A. (2005). Work and family research in IO/OB: Content analysis and review of the literature (1980–2002). Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 124–197. Edwards, J. R., & Rothbard, N. P. (2000). Mechanisms linking work and family: Clarifying the relationship between work and family constructs. Academy of Management Review, 25, 178–199. Feldman, P. J., Cohen, S., Lepore, S., Matthews, K., Kamarck, T. W., & Marsland, A. L. (1999). Negative emotions and acute psychological responses to stress. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 21, 216–222. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: Study of emotion and coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 150–170. Fox, M. L., & Dwyer, D. J. (1999). An investigation of the effects of time and involvement in the relationship between stressors and work–family conflict. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 164–174. Fox, S., Spector, P. E., & Miles, D. (2001). Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) in response to job stressors and organizational justice: Some mediator and moderator tests for autonomy and emotions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 291–309. Frankenhaeuser, M., Lundberg, U., Fredrikson, M., & Melin, B. (1989). Stress on and off the job as related to sex and occupational status in white-collar workers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10, 321–346. Friedman, S. D., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2000). Work and family–allies or enemies? What happens when business professionals confront life choices. New York: Oxford University Press. Frone, M. R. (2000). Work–family conflict and employee psychiatric disorders: The national comorbidity survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 888–895. Frone, M. R. (2003). Work–family balance. In: J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds), Handbook of occupational health psychology (pp. 143–162). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Frone, M. R., Barnes, G. M., & Farrell, M. P. (1994). Relationship of work–family conflict to substance use among employed mothers: The role of negative affect. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 1019–1030. Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Barnes, G. M. (1996). Work–family conflict, gender, and healthrelated outcomes: A study of employed parents in two community samples. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 57–69. Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1991). Relationship of work and family stressors to psychological distress: The independent moderating influence of social support, mastery, active coping, and self-focused attention. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 227–250. Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1995). Job stressors, job involvement and employee health: A test of identity theory. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 68, 1–11. Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1997). Relation of work–family conflict to health outcomes: A four-year longitudinal study of employed parents. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 70, 325–335. Fu, C. K., & Shaffer, M. A. (2001). The tug of work and family: Direct and indirect domainspecific determinants of work–family conflict. Personnel Review, 30, 502–522.

Work–Family Conflict and Health

93

Geurts, S., Kompier, M. A. J., Roxburgh, S., & Houtman, I. L. D. (2003). Does work–home interference mediate the relationship between workload and well-being? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 532–559. Goldstein, I. B., Shapiro, D., Chicz-DeMet, A., & Guthrie, D. (1999). Ambulatory blood pressure, heart rate, and neuroendocrine responses in women nurses during work and off work days. Psychosomatic Medicine, 61, 296–387. Grandey, A. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1999). The conservation of resources model applied to work–family conflict and strain. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 350–370. Greenglass, E. R. (1996). Anger suppression, cynical distrust, and hostility: Implications for coronary heart disease. In: C. D. Spielberger, I. G. Sarason, J. M. T. Brebner, E. Greenglass, P. Laungani & A. M. O’Roark (Eds), Stress and emotion: Anxiety, anger, and curiosity (pp. 205–225). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Greenglass, E. R., Pantony, K., & Burke, R. J. (1989). A gender-role perspective on role conflict, work stress and social support. In: E. B. Goldsmith (Ed.), Work and family theory, research, and applications (pp. 317–328). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review, 10, 76–88. Greenhaus, J. H., Collins, K. M., & Shaw, J. D. (2003). The relation between work–family balance and quality of life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 510–531. Greenhaus, J. H., & Parasuraman, S. (1986). A work–nonwork interactive perspective of stress and its consequence. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 8(2), 37–60. Greenhaus, J. H., & Parasuraman, S. (1994). Work–family conflict, social support, and wellbeing. In: M. J. Davidson & R. J. Burke (Eds), Women in management: Current research issues (pp. 213–229). London: Paul Chapman. Greenhaus, J. H., & Parasuraman, S. (1999). Research on work, family, and gender: Current status and future directions. In: G. N. Powell (Ed.), Handbook of gender and work (pp. 391–412). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S., Granrose, C. S., Rabinowitz, S., & Beutell, N. J. (1989). Sources of work–family conflict among two-career couples. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 34, 133–153. Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (2003). When work and family collide: Deciding between competing role demands. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90, 291–303. Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of work– family enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 1–21. Grzywacz, J. G. (2000). Work–family spillover and health during midlife: Is managing conflict everything? American Journal of Health Promotion, 14, 236–243. Grzywacz, J. G., & Bass, B. L. (2003). Work, family, and mental health: Testing different models of work–family fit. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 248–262. Grzywacz, J. G., & Marks, N. F. (2000). Family, work, work–family spillover, and problem drinking during midlife. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 336–348. Grzywacz, J. G., & Marks, N. F. (2001). Social inequalities and exercise during adulthood: Toward an ecological perspective. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 42, 202–220. Guelzow, M. G., Bird, G. W., & Koball, E. H. (1991). An exploratory path analysis of the stress process for dual-career men and women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 151–164.

94

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

Hall, D. T. (1972). A model of coping with role conflict: The role behavior of college educated women. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 471–486. Hall, D. T. (1976). Careers in organizations. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. Hammer, L. B., Allen, E., & Grigsby, T. D. (1997). Work–family conflict in dual-earner couples: Within-individual and crossover effects of work and family. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 185–203. Hammer, L. B., Bauer, T. N., & Grandey, A. A. (2003). Work–family conflict and work-related withdrawal behaviors. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17, 419–426. Hammer, L. B., Cullen, J. C., Neal, M. B., Sinclair, R. R., & Shafiro, M. (2005). The longitudinal effects of work–family conflict and positive spillover on experiences of depressive symptoms among dual-earner couples. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10(2), 138–154. Hammer, T. H., Saksvik, P. O., Nytro, K., Torvatn, H., & Bayaziet, M. (2004). Expanding the psychosocial work environment: Workplace norms and work–family conflict as correlates of stress and health. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 9, 83–97. Hellerstedt, W. L., & Jeffery, R. W. (1997). The association of job strain and health behaviors in men and women. International Journal of Epidemiology, 26, 575–583. Higgins, C. A., & Duxbury, L. W. (1992). Work–family conflict: A comparison of dual-career and traditional-career men. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 389–411. Hughes, D. L., & Galinsky, E. (1994). Gender, job and family conditions, and psychological symptoms. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 251–270. Jacobs, J. A., & Gerson, K. (1998). Who are the overworked Americans? Review of Social Economy, 56, 442–459. Jansen, A. W. H., Kant, I., Kristensen, T. S., & Nijhuis, F. J. N. (2003). Antecedents and consequences of work–family conflict: A prospective cohort study. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 45, 479–491. Jex, S. M., & Elacqua, T. C. (1999). Time management as a moderator of relations between stressors and employee strain. Work & Stress, 13, 182–191. Jones, F., & Bright, J. (2001). Stress myth, theory and research. Essex, UK: Prentice Hall. Judge, T. A., Boudreau, J. W., & Bretz, R. D. (1994). Job and life attitudes of male executives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 767–782. Julkunen, J. (1996). Suppressing your anger: Good manners, bad health? In: C. D. Spielberger, I. G. Sarason, J. M. T. Brebner, E. Greenglass, P. Laungani & A. M. O’Roark (Eds), Stress and emotion: Anxiety, anger, and curiosity (pp. 227–240). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R., Snoek, J. D., & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational stress. New York: Wiley. Kanter, R. M. (1977). Work and family in the United States: A critical review and agenda for research and policy. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Keith, P. M., & Schafer, R. B. (1980). Role strain and depression in two-job families. Family Relations, 29, 483–488. Kelloway, E. K., Gottlieb, B. H., & Barham, L. (1999). The source, nature and direction of work and family conflict: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 43, 37–346. Kinnunen, U., & Mauno, S. (1998). Antecedents and outcomes of work–family conflict among employed women and men in Finland. Human Relations, 51, 157–175.

Work–Family Conflict and Health

95

Kirchmeyer, C., & Cohen, A. (1999). Different strategies for managing the work/nonwork interface: A test for unique pathways to work outcomes. Work & Stress, 13, 59–73. Klitzman, S., House, J. S., Israel, B. A., & Mero, R. P. (1990). Work stress, nonwork stress, and health. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 13, 221–243. Kopelman, R. E., Greenhaus, J. H., & Connolly, T. F. (1983). A model of work, family, and interrole conflict: A construct validation study. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 32, 198–215. Kossek, E. E., & Ozeki, C. (1998). Work–family conflict, policies, and the job–life satisfaction relationship: A review and directions for organizational behavior human resources research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 139–149. Lambert, S. J. (1990). Processes linking work and family: A critical review and research agenda. Human Relations, 43, 239–257. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer. Lazarus, R. S., & Smith, C. (1988). Knowledge and appraisal in the cognition–emotion relationship. Cognition and Emotion, 2, 281–300. Leiter, M. P., & Durup, M. J. (1996). Work, home, and in-between: A longitudinal study of spillover. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32, 29–47. Lobel, S. A. (1991). Allocation of investment in work and family roles: Alternative theories and implications for research. Academy of Management Review, 16, 507–521. Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In: M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297–1349). Chicago: RandMcNally. Lovallo, W. R. (1997). Stress & health. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lundberg, U., & Frankenhaeuser, M. (1999). Stress and workload of men and women in highranking positions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 142–151. MacEwen, K. E., & Barling, J. (1994). Daily consequences of work interference with family and family interference with work. Work and Stress, 8, 244–254. Major, V. S., Klein, K. J., & Ehrhart, M. G. (2002). Work time, work interference with family, and psychological distress. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 427–436. Mallard, A. G. C., & Lance, C. E. (1998). Development and evaluation of a parent–employee interrole conflict scale. Social Indicators Research, 45, 343–370. Manz, C. C., & Neck, C. P. (2004). Mastering self-leadership: Empowering yourself for personal excellence. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice-Hall. Marks, S. R. (1977). Multiple roles and role strain: Some notes on human energy, time and commitment. American Sociological Review, 42, 921–936. Marks, S. R., & MacDermid, S. M. (1996). Multiple roles and the self: A theory of role balance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 417–432. Matsui, T., Oshawa, T., & Onglatco, M. L. (1995). Work–family conflict and the stressbuffering effects of husband support and coping behavior among Japanese married working women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 47, 178–192. Matthews, L. S., Conger, R. D., & Wickrama, K. A. S. (1996). Work–family conflict and marital quality: Mediating processes. Social Psychology Journal, 59, 62–79. Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). Convergence between measures of workto-family and family to-work conflict: A meta-analytic examination. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67(2), 215–232. Milliken, F. J., & Dunn-Jensen, L. M. (2005). The changing time demands of managerial and professional work: Implications for managing the work–life boundary. In: E. E. Kossek

96

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

& S. J. Lambert (Eds), Work and life integration: Organizational, cultural, and individual perspectives (pp. 43–59). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Nelson, D. L., Quick, J. C., Hitt, M. A., & Moesel, D. (1990). Politics, lack of career progress, and work/home conflict: Stress and strain for working women. Sex Roles, 23, 169–182. Netemeyer, R. G., Boles, J. S., & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and validation of work– family conflict and family work–conflict scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 400–410. Ng, D. N., & Jeffery, R. W. (2003). Relationships between perceived stress and health behaviors in a sample of working adults. Health Psychology, 22, 638–642. Nomaguchi, K. M., & Bianchi, S. M. (2004). Exercise time: Gender differences in the effects of marriage, parenthood, and employment. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 413–430. Noor, N. (2002). The moderating effect of spouse support on the relationship between work variables and women’s work–family conflict. Psychologia: An International Journal of Psychology in the Orient, 45, 12–23. Noor, N. (2004). Work–family conflict, work and family role salience, and women’s well-being. Journal of Social Psychology, 144, 389–405. O’Driscoll, M. P., Ilgen, D. R., & Hildreth, K. (1992). Time devoted to job and off-job activities, interrole conflict, and affective experiences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 272–279. O’Driscoll, M. P., Poelmans, S., Spector, P. E., Kallieath, T., Allen, T. D., Cooper, C., & Sanchez, J. (2003). Family responsive interventions, perceived organizational and supervisor support, work–family conflict, and psychological strain. International Journal of Stress Management, 10, 326–344. Pak, S. K., Olsen, L. K., & Mahoney, B. S. (2000). The relationships of health behaviors to perceived stress, job satisfaction, and role modeling among health professionals in South Korea. International Journal of Community Health Education, 19, 65–76. Parasuraman, S., Greenhaus, J. H., & Granrose, C. S. (1992). Role stressors, social support, and well-being among two-career couples. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 339–356. Parasuraman, S., Greenhaus, J. H., Rabinowitz, S., Bedeian, A. G., & Mossholder, K. W. (1989). Work and family variables as mediators of the relationship between wife’s employment and husband’s well-being. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 185–201. Parasuraman, S., Purohit, Y. S., Godshalk, V. M., & Beutell, N. J. (1996). Work and family variables, entrepreneurial success and psychological well-being. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48, 275–300. Parasuraman, S., & Simmers, C. A. (2001). Type of employment, work–family conflict and wellbeing: A comparative study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 551–568. Perrewe, P. L., Hochwarter, W. A., & Kiewitz, C. (1999). Value attainment: An explanation for the negative effects of work–family conflict on job and life satisfaction. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 318–326. Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E. (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin. Powell, G. N. & Greenhaus, J. H. (2005). Managing incidents of time-based work–family conflict: A three-stage process. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Honolulu, Hawaii. Reifman, A., Biernat, M., & Lang, E. L. (1991). Stress, social support, and health in married professional women with small children. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 431–445.

Work–Family Conflict and Health

97

Repetti, R. L. (1987). Linkages between work and family roles. In: S. Oskamp (Ed.), Family processes and problems: Social psychological aspects (pp. 98–127). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Rice, R. W., Frone, M. R., & McFarlin, D. B. (1992). Work–nonwork conflict and the perceived quality of life. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 155–168. Rotundo, D. M., Carlson, D. S., & Kincaid, J. F. (2003). Coping with multiple dimensions of work–family conflict. Personnel Review, 32, 275–296. Sacco, W. P., & Dunn, V. K. (1990). Effect of actor depression on observer attributions: Existence and impact of negative attributions toward the depressed. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59. Sanderson, C. A. (2004). Health psychology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Schieman, S., McBrier, D. B., & Van Gundy, K. (2003). Home-to-work conflict, work qualities, and emotional distress. Sociological Forum, 18, 137–164. Sieber, S. D. (1974). Toward a theory of role accumulation. American Sociological Review, 39, 567–578. Small, S. A., & Riley, D. (1990). Toward a multidimensional assessment of work spillover into family life. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 51–61. Spector, P. E. (1998). A control model of the job stress process. In: C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of organizational stress (pp. 153–169). London: Oxford University Press. Spector, P. E., Cooper, C. L., Poelmans, S., Allen, T. D., O’Driscoll, M., Sanchez, J. I., Siu, O. L., Dewe, P., Hart, P., Lu, L., De Moraes, L. F. R., Ostrognay, G. M., Sparks, K., Wong, P., & Yu, S. F. (2004). A cross-national comparative study of work–family stressors, working hours, and well-being: China and Latin America versus the Anglo world. Personnel Psychology, 57, 119–142. Spector, P. E., Dwyer, D. J., & Jex, S. M. (1988). The relationship of job stressors to affective, health, and performance outcomes: A comparison of multiple data sources. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 11–19. Spector, P. E., & Jex, S. M. (1998). Development of four self-report measures of job stressors and strain: Interpersonal conflict at work scale, organizational constraints scale, quantitative workload inventory, and physical symptoms inventory. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 356–367. Steffy, B. D., & Laker, D. R. (1991). Workplace and personal stresses antecedent to employees’ alcohol use. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 115–126. Stephens, M. A. P., Franks, M. M., & Atienza, A. A. (1997). Where two roles intersect: Spillover between parent care and employment. Psychology and Aging, 12, 30–37. Stewart, W., & Barling, J. (1996). Fathers’ work experiences effect children’s behaviors via jobrelated affect and parenting behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 221–232. Stoeva, A. Z., Chiu, R. K., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2002). Negative affectivity, role stress, and work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 1–16. Sumer, H. C., & Knight, P. A. (2001). How do people with different attachment styles balance work and family? A personality perspective on work–family linkage. Journal of Applied Psychology,, 86, 653–663. Thoits, P. A. (1991). On merging identity theory and stress research. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54, 101–112. Thomas, L. T., & Ganster, D. C. (1995). Impact of family supportive work variables on work– family conflict and strain: A control perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 6–15. Thompson, C. A., Beauvais, L. L., & Lyness, K. S. (1999). When work–family benefits are not enough. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 392–415.

98

JEFFREY H. GREENHAUS ET AL.

Tiedje, L. B., Wortman, C. B., Downey, G., Emmons, C., Biernat, M., & Lang, E. (1990). Women with multiple roles role: Compatibility perceptions, satisfaction, and mental health. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 63–72. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2000). Healthy people 2010 (2nd ed). Washington DC: US Government Printing Office (November). VanKatwyk, P. T., Fox, S., Spector, P. E., & Kelloway, E. K. (2000). Using the job-related affective well-being scale (JAWS) to investigate affective responses to work stressors. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 219–230. Vasse, R. M., Nijhuis, F. J. N., & Kok, G. (1998). Associations between work stress, alcohol consumption, and sickness absence. Addiction, 93, 231–241. Vinokur, A. D., Pierce, P. F., & Buck, C. L. (1999). Work–family conflicts of women in the Air Force: Their influence on mental health and functioning. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 865–878. Viswesvaran, C., Sanchez, J. I., & Fisher, J. (1999). The role of social support in the process of work stress: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 314–334. Voydanoff, P. (2004). Work, community, and parenting resources and demands as predictors of adolescent problems and grades. Journal of Adolescent Research, 19, 155–173. Wayne, J. H., Musisca, N., & Fleeson, W. (2004). Considering the role of personality in the work–family experience: Relationships of the Big Five to work–family conflict and facilitation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 108–130. Weiss, H. M. (2002). Conceptual and empirical foundations for the study of affect at work. In: R. G. Lord, R. J. Klimoski & R. Kanfer (Eds), Emotions in the workplace: Understanding the structure and role of emotions in organizational behavior (pp. 20–63). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Westman, M. (2001). Stress and strain crossover. Human Relations, 54, 717–751. Westman, M., & Etzion, D. (1995). Crossover of stress, strain and resource from one spouse to another. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 169–181. Westman, M., & Vinokur, A. D. (1998). Unraveling the relationship of distress levels within couples: Common stressors, empathetic reactions, or crossover via social interaction. Human Relations, 51, 137–156. Westman, M., Vinokur, A. D., Hamilton, V. L., & Roziner, I. (2004). Crossover of marital dissatisfaction during military downsizing among Russian Army officers and their spouses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 769–779. Wiley, D. L. (1987). The relationship between work/nonwork role conflict and job-related outcomes: Some unanticipated findings. Journal of Management, 13, 467–472. Williams, K. J., & Alliger, G. M. (1994). Role stressors, mood spillover, and perceptions of work– family conflict in employed parents. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 837–868. Williams, K. J., Suls, J., Alliger, G. M., Learner, S. M., & Wan, C. K. (1991). Multiple role juggling and daily mood states in working mothers: An experience sampling study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 664–674. Wiese, B. S., Freund, A. M., & Baltes, P. B. (2002). Subjective career success and emotional well-being: Longitudinal predictive power of selection, optimization, and compensation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 321–335.

RELATIONSHIP OF THE NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION OF WORK HOURS TO HEALTH AND QUALITY-OF-LIFE (QOL) OUTCOMES Rosalind Chait Barnett ABSTRACT Major demographic trends are affecting the work schedules of U.S. employees with likely consequences for health and quality-of-life outcomes. These trends include long work hours, at least for some groups of employees, and an increasing proportion of employees in the U.S. and other countries who are working nonstandard work schedules. This chapter contains a review of the empirical literature linking the number of hours worked and the distribution of those hours at the individual and couple level to a variety of outcomes, cross-sectionally and longitudinally. In addition, because the majority of U.S. workers live in dyads (Jacobs & Gerson (2004). The time divide: Work, family and gender inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press), major attention is given to the impact of work hours on the employee’s spouse as well as on the employee. It is also noted that the relationship between work hours and outcomes might be different among employed single women with children. Employee Health, Coping and Methodologies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 5, 99–138 Copyright r 2006 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(05)05003-1

99

100

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

Data are presented from two new studies conducted by my research team to fill some of the critical knowledge gaps. Finally, I suggest some directions for future research.

OVERVIEW Many chapters in these volumes have examined the relationship between workplace stressors (e.g., job control, job demands) and stress-related physical and mental health outcomes, but none has considered work hours as a potential stressor. Why should one focus on work hours? A rash of recent books draws attention to the crucial role of time in the lives of working families: The Time Divide (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004), the Time Bind (Hochschild, 1997), and Fighting for Time (Epstein & Kalleberg, 2004) are but a few. In addition to concerns about work hours and their effects on health and quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes, a similar concern has been raised about nonstandard work schedules. A surprisingly large and increasing number of U.S. and other workers is currently working nonstandard schedules. Moreover, there is reason to believe that such schedules have negative effects on outcomes. (Unless indicated otherwise, the term ‘‘outcomes’’ is used throughout this chapter to refer to health and QOL outcomes.) Given the growing trends in the United States toward longer work hours and more nonstandard work schedules, careful scrutiny of the linkages between work schedules and outcomes is needed now more than ever. This chapter contains a review of the empirical literature linking the number of hours worked and the distribution of those hours at the individual and couple level to a variety of outcomes, cross-sectionally and longitudinally. Where appropriate, I point out limitations in this literature, including inadequate attention to such indirect effects as moderation and mediation, and even less attention to the role of community resources in exacerbating or ameliorating the effects of the number and distribution of work hours on outcomes. I also suggest research designs and methods that address such shortcomings. In addition, because the majority of U.S. workers live in dyads (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004), major attention is given in this chapter to the impact of work hours on the employee’s spouse as well as on the employees. It is also noted that the relationship between work hours and outcomes might be different among employed single women with children. Finally, I present data from two new studies conducted by my research team to fill some of the critical knowledge gaps. One of these studies concerns the number of work hours; the other, the distribution of work hours. Each

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

101

study takes the family (i.e., the marital dyad), not the individual employee, as the unit of analysis.

NUMBER OF HOURS WORKED ‘‘The amount of time demanded by occupations [is]...among the most obvious and important ways that occupational life affects family life’’ (Kanter, 1977, p. 31).

The Current Situation Demographics American workers now clock more hours per year than they have in the past and than workers in any other industrialized country, including France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and even Japan (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004; Presser, 2004). In 2000, the average American worked 1,978 h, an increase of about a week of work per year since 1990. The average Australian, Canadian, Japanese, or Mexican worker was on the job about 100 fewer hours per year than the average American – almost two-and-a-half fewer weeks. And Germans worked approximately 500 fewer hours per year, or 12-and-a-half fewer weeks, than U.S. workers (DeLille & Lee, 2001). The exceptionally large number of annual work hours currently worked by Americans is due primarily to a large number of weeks worked per year rather than to longer hours worked per week (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004; Schor, 1991). This state of affairs is due in part to American employees having comparatively short vacations, but primarily to females having become increasingly committed to full-time uninterrupted work patterns. Although the number of hours worked per week by Americans is relatively large compared to many other countries, it has remained fairly constant over the past 40 years; American men work an average of about 42 h per week for pay, while American women work an average of about 36 h per week for pay. Another distinguishing feature of the current U.S. workforce, both in comparison to earlier times and in comparison to other countries, is the large variance in work hours per week across employees. Especially noteworthy is the high percentage of male and female American workers, who clock 50 or more hours per week. The proportion of Americans working extremely long hours has been increasing since 1970 (Jacobs & Gerson, 1997). Currently, among American men, 27% put in more than 50 h per week on the job,

102

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

compared with 26% in Belgium, 17% in France, 11% in Finland, and 3% in Sweden (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004). And, the United States has the highest percentage of women who work 50 h per week or more (11%). Although American women who work very long weeks are not as numerous as their male counterparts, they surpass female employees in Germany (7%), the United Kingdom (4%), the Netherlands (0.2%), and Sweden (0.4%) (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004). It is also noteworthy that the time squeeze created by spending more hours at paid work is not universal; for men and women alike, the proportion of people working long hours increases as education level increases (Jacobs & Gerson, 1997, p. 13). Relatedly, long work hours are a fact of life for many professionals and managers, who are ‘‘especially likely to shape the terms of public discussion and debate’’ (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004, p. 39). Poorly educated people are likely to have relatively meager economic resources and therefore need to work long hours. However, they may have difficulty getting a job. Even if they are successful, they may need to work more than one job. And adequate data on multiple job holders are unfortunately not typically included in reports on work time (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2005). According to Jacobs and Gerson (1997), a substantial number of employees who work in excess of 50 h per week would prefer to work far fewer hours: 63% of those who work 50+ h per week and 80% of those who work 60+ h per week. Indeed, on average, their preference would be to work as many as 11 h per week less. Following conventional wisdom, the investigators asked whether women would want to work fewer hours than men, especially if they have young children. Contrary to expectation, gender is not a strong predictor of preferred work hours; men as well as women want to work fewer hours (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004). In fact, ‘‘gender differences within age groups are generally small’’ (p. 70). Interestingly, family circumstances are more important than gender in predicting preferred work hours: both mothers and fathers with young children want more time away from work than do other groups. Although women with small children cut back on their time at paid work more so than men, they do so to a smaller extent than in previous generations. In sum, Jacobs and Gerson (2004) found little support for the oft-stated argument that married women with young children are the primary group wishing to work less. ‘‘In fact, about half of married men and women across a range of family situations express such a desire’’ (p. 73). Their overall conclusion is that the gap between actual and preferred work hours primarily reflects the options offered by employers, not the desires of employees (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004, p. 77).

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

103

Perhaps, the most substantial change in the U.S. workforce is the growing percentage of dual-earner couples. Currently, such couples comprise about two-thirds of all married couples compared to the 1960s when the traditional breadwinner–homemaker family form was the norm. This dyad is even more common among couples with children in the home (Roehling & Moen, 2003), representing 64% of such families (Roehling & Moen, 2003). Along with the increase in the number of dual-earner couples, the average combined working time of these couples has ‘‘risen far more dramatically than that of individual workers’’ (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004, p. 4). American couples report the largest number of combined hours of couples in all 10 countries included in the OECD analysis (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004, p.132). In 1970, American dual-earner couples clocked a combined average of 78 h per week; by 2002 that figure had jumped to 81 h per week (Bond, Thompson, Galinsky, & Prottas, 2003). And the difference between the United States and the other countries is even more marked when it comes to the percentage of couples working an unusually large number of hours (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004, p. 133). In general, it appears that the time demands and pressures on American dual-earner families are substantial and continuing to increase.

Research Status At first glance there is a commonsense appeal to the study of health and QOL outcomes in relation to number of work hours, a seemingly straightforward, objective, and ‘‘clean’’ variable. Moreover, the focus on work hours has the advantage of being easily communicated to important consumers of research, namely, corporate decision makers who have the power to change work conditions. Although this formulation has an elegant simplicity, the reality, as we shall see, is that the number of work hours is less straightforward a variable than it appears and the ‘‘cleanliness’’ of the data is illusory. For example, not all researchers operationalize work hours similarly: Some measure only the actual number of hours on the job; others include time outside of work spent on work-related activities; and still others include commuting time. Also, many employees may underreport their work hours for tax purposes (Perry-Jenkins, in press) or overreport them due to social desirability bias, among other reasons (Robinson, Chenu, & Alvarez, 2002). And workers who have seasonal or erratic schedules may have a hard time answering questions about the number of hours they work in a ‘‘typical’’ week. Obviously, this lack of uniformity and susceptibility to measurement problems makes comparisons across studies quite difficult.

104

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

It is generally assumed in the literature that long work hours per se are a major stressor. The underlying premise is that both workplaces and families are greedy institutions, making myriad demands on incumbents. As workers extend their workdays to meet those demands, time dilemmas deepen, especially for employees who have young children to care for. As conflict increases, so do negative health outcomes and heightened work/family conflict. The reasoning is that short work hours provide a degree of flexibility that long hours do not afford and should therefore have salutary effects on stress-related mental and physical health outcomes. Given this formulation, it is easy to understand the appeal of focusing on work hours as the ‘‘culprit.’’ Indeed, organized labor fought one of its first occupationalhealth fights over reducing work hours. Perhaps not surprisingly, little attention has been paid to the seemingly counterintuitive hypothesis that long work hours might be associated with positive outcomes. Yet, those who work longer hours typically earn more money than those who work short hours. In addition, those who work long hours usually have access to more benefits and greater opportunities for advancement, as well as higher job security – conditions that might reasonably be associated with good outcomes. It has also been argued that engagement in both work and family roles may lead to work–family enrichment (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006), another positive outcome. Unfortunately, the salutary effects of work hours on outcomes have not received the attention needed. It should also be noted that positive outcomes might mitigate negative outcomes, obscuring potentially significant relationships between work hours and outcomes. Obviously, to understand the relationship between work hours per se and outcomes, one must control for a host of covariates. For example, because number of work hours is conflated with earnings, to assess the effects of work hours per se, one must control for the pecuniary aspects of work hours (Stolzenberg, 2001). Similarly, working long hours in a high-strain job (i.e., one characterized by high demands and low control) is likely to have more serious outcomes (e.g., poor marital-role, parent-role, and job-role quality) than working in a low-strain job. Other critical covariates include gender; job conditions; job flexibility; voluntariness of work hours; and, if voluntary, the reasons for working a given schedule (Negrey, 1993). For example, in a study of full-time employed dual-earner couples, Barnett and Brennan (1995, 1997) found no significant association between hours on the job and psychological distress for full-time employed men or women after controlling for seven job conditions. Interestingly, in the same analysis, substantive complexity (i.e., the degree to which the job consists of nonrepetitive,

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

105

nonroutine activities) was found to be significantly related to distress, both cross-sectionally and longitudinally, after controlling for work hours. Based on these findings, it seems likely that the relationship between work hours and outcomes might vary according to the level of substantive complexity. Long work hours in a job that is low in substantive complexity might be particularly lethal (Parcel & Menaghan, 1994a,b). Further doubts on the centrality of work hours per se are raised by two studies, the results of which show that when union membership, and presumably benefits, are controlled, the number of hours worked is not a significant predictor of psychological distress (Lowe & Northcott, 1988; Piltch, 1992). Unfortunately, few studies have included measures of all or even most of the important covariates. Three other limitations of current research also warrant attention. First, almost all studies are conducted on individual employees, ignoring the fact that most employees live in dyads. Such employees tend to make and evaluate decisions about the number and distribution of work hours within the couple. Moreover, if work hours affect the outcomes of one partner, they are also likely to have effects on the other partner. Thus, to gain a full appreciation of the overall effects of work hours on employee outcomes, one needs to take the couple, not the individual employee, as the unit of analysis. Second, few studies consider the subjective meaning that work hours have for employees. If the employee experiences her/his work hours as a good fit with her/his own and family needs, then number of work hours is unlikely to be associated with negative outcomes. Alternatively, if the number of work hours is the poor fit, negative outcomes are more likely. Such subjective aspects of work hours are understudied. Yet, evidence suggests that these aspects of work hours are more powerful predictors of outcomes than is the absolute number of hours worked per se. Third, most studies in this literature estimate only the direct effects of work hours on outcomes; little attention is paid to indirect effects. In general, indirect effects refer to the factors that affect the magnitude and direction of the relationship between work hours and outcomes (i.e., moderators) and to the processes through which work hours have an effect (i.e., mediators). Moderators include such factors as race, educational attainment, and gender. Mediators are factors that must be in place before the outcomes can be realized. These include the presence of a supportive manager and whether there are effective flexible workplace policies at the worksite. Not surprisingly, the empirical evidence linking work hours to outcomes is inconsistent (Barnett, 1998, 2004; House, Strecher, Metzner, & Robbins, 1986; Sparks, Cooper, Fried, & Shirom, 1997). Some studies report significant

106

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

negative effects; others, significant positive effects; and still others, no significant effects at all. Moreover, almost all studies are cross-sectional, making it difficult to disentangle the causal direction of effects. To illustrate, whereas it is often assumed that long work hours ‘‘cause’’ health and QOL problems, it is also possible that health and QOL problems ‘‘cause’’ short work hours. Employees who are feeling poorly or who are having difficulties on the job might reduce their work hours, whereas those who are healthy might opt for longer work hours. Several studies described below address this ‘‘healthy worker’’ effect. Although longitudinal studies do not establish a causal order, they can shed light on the sequencing of events. Far too few longitudinal studies have been done on the linkages between work hours and outcomes. For example, Sparks et al. (1997) located 31 quantitative studies published between 1965 and 1996 of the health effects of long work hours. Of these, 19 provided adequate data a the meta-analysis. The authors found a small but positive association between long work hours and health. When the health outcomes were disaggregated, the researchers reported a larger effect on psychological health (r ¼ 0:15) than on physiological health (r ¼ 0:06). Importantly, none of the studies was longitudinal. Clearly, longitudinal studies with the couple as the unit of analysis and with appropriate controls are critical to furthering our understanding of the linkages between work hours and outcomes.

Objective Work Hours and Outcomes Individual-Level Analyses Given the different ways in which number of work hours is operationalized, it is not surprising that the empirical findings relating employee work hours per se to a variety of outcomes are inconsistent. Staines and Pleck (1983) found that longer hours per week on the job are associated with scheduling difficulties at home, and other researchers reported that longer hours are associated with reports of work/family strain for both sexes and with the perception that paid work interferes with family hours (Gutek, Searle, & Klepa, 1991; Keith & Schafer, 1980; Marshall & Barnett, 1993; Moen & Yu, 2000; Staines & Pleck, 1983). Other literature suggests that the amount of time spent in work is only moderately correlated with the perception that work and family interfere with each other. Gutek et al. (1991) found correlations of 0.35 for men and 0.50 for women, leading them to argue that people’s perception of work– family conflict cannot be interpreted as an indicator of the amount of time spent in those activities. Even studies reporting some support for the

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

107

premise that long work hours shortchange the family and generate work– family conflict are inconclusive: The perception of strain is not universal or unidirectional. For example, 65% of the workers studied by Staines and Pleck (1983) reported that their jobs and families did not interfere with each other. And, in a study of 300 full-time employed dual-earner couples, Marshall and Barnett (1993) found that more than a quarter of the parents reported that combining employment and parenting did not cause such work–family strains as ‘‘not having enough time or energy for their children’’ or ‘‘worrying about the impact of their working on their children.’’ In fact, over two-thirds of the men and women reported that combining work and parenting had definite gains, including making them better parents. Thus, working long hours does not lead inevitably to work–family conflict. With the important exceptions of shiftwork (Presser, 2004) and excessive hours (Parcel & Menaghan, 1994b), the length of the work week has often been related to positive outcomes. For example, compared with employees who work fewer hours, those who work longer hours report better physical health, lower levels of psychological distress, and less anxiety (Barnett, Raudenbush, Brennan, Pleck, & Marshall, 1995; Bird & Fremont, 1991; Hughes & Galinsky, 1994; Kohn & Schooler, 1982). Moreover, in a sample of professional women with preschool-age children, almost half reported that rather than the time they spent on the job being a problem, not being able to spend as much time at work as they should was a problem (Emmons, Biernat, Tiejde, Lang, & Wortman, 1990). Furthermore, in a longitudinal analyses, Wethington and Kessler (1989) found that among white married women, those who increased their work hours from homemaker to high part-time (i.e., 20–34 h/week) or full-time (i.e., 35 or more hours/week), but not to low part-time (i.e., 10–19 h/week), over a three-year period, reported fewer symptoms of psychological distress. In contrast, women who decreased their hours from full-time to homemaker reported an increase in such symptoms. However, women who decreased their work hours from full-time to low part-time did not show a similar increase in symptoms. It is important to point out that this study, as well as many others (e.g., Herold & Waldron, 1985; House, et al., 1986; Verbrugge, 1989), report data from just two time data points. Such studies are unable to address important questions about the relationship between change over time in work hours and change over time in a stress-related or QOL outcome. Three data points, at a minimum, are needed to model any of the possible nonlinear trajectories that can link work hours to outcomes. Noting this limitation, House et al. (1986) caution that firmer validation of these results ‘‘...must await further longitudinal or prospective studies in which

108

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

job pressures and tensions, and other occupational stressors as well, are ascertained at multiple time points’’ (p. 72; emphasis added). Other studies have reported no significant relationship between time on the job and such diverse outcomes as marital tension, marital companionship, self-reported happiness, work commitment, job satisfaction, role conflict, perceived control, and the quality of the home environments that employed married mothers provide for their children (Crohan, Antonucci, & Adelmann, 1989; Hughes, Galinsky, & Morris, 1992; Menaghan & Parcel, 1991). In an analysis of data from a nonrandom sample of 141 dual-earner couples with at least one young child, in which one partner (usually the woman) was a physician working reduced hours, my colleagues and I found no relationship between work hours per se and any of the outcomes studied; that is, burnout, intention to turn over, psychological distress, and maritalrole quality (Barnett & Gareis, 2000a,b; Barnett, Gareis, & Brennan, 1999). In this study, shorter work hours did not necessarily reduce overall stress. Moreover, the relationship between work hours and health outcomes was often moderated or mediated by individual, work, and family variables. And, in the Wisconsin Maternity Leave and Health Project, a two-wave longitudinal study of couples following the birth of a child, Klein, Hyde, Essex, and Clark (1998) found that 12 months after the birth (T2), work hours per week were not significantly associated with depression or anxiety, after controlling for the level of anxiety and depression at four months postpartum (T1). Moreover, Hyde, Klein, Essex, and Clark (1995) found no evidence that women’s mental health at T1 predicted their employment status at T2. These and other data from longitudinal studies strongly challenge the veracity of the healthy-worker effect. In addition to the Marshall and Barnett (1993) study described above, several other studies point to the importance of inquiring about positive as well as negative aspects of combining work and family roles. For example, in studies of intergenerational caregiving, when asked about the ways in which their work responsibilities affected their caregiving, 48% of a sample of full-time employed middle-aged workers who were providing unpaid assistance to a relative aged 60 or older mentioned that their employment resulted in insufficient time for their caregiving (Scharlach, 1994). However, 38% said their work had no negative effects on their care-giving responsibilities. Moreover, when asked to rate the overall impact of their job on their care-giving activities, 55% said that the impact was mostly positive, citing increased financial resources, improved relationships with the care recipient, and support from co-workers. And, fully two-thirds of the workers rated their care-giving experience as positive overall.

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

109

Evidence is now mounting that subjective aspects of work hours are better predictors of outcomes than are the objective number of work hours per se. In a cross-sectional study of 98 married full-time and reduced-hours female physicians with children, schedule fit, defined as the degree to which their and their husbands’ work schedules meet their and their husbands’ needs, was a significant predictor of distress, whereas objective work hours was not (Gareis & Barnett, 2002). Echoing these results, Crouter, Bumpus, Head, and McHale (2001) found that subjective aspects of fathers’ work schedules were more predictive of outcomes than were objective aspects. For example, their subjective feelings of role overload were a more powerful predictor of their marital quality than was the number of hours they worked. In the study of 141 reduced-hours physicians described above, another subjective indicator, difficulty of tradeoffs; that is, the degree of distress experienced due to the discrepancy between the professional activities they would like to perform and their current work arrangement, was a much stronger predictor of three QOL outcomes (current job-role quality, intention to turnover, and psychological distress) than was number of hours worked (Barnett & Gareis, 2000a). Although the sample for the study was physicians who had reduced their work hours from full-time to part-time, difficulty of tradeoffs could also be relevant to full-time employees who, for example, had made tradeoffs to take a promotion or who had to make tradeoffs because they were demoted. Finally, subjective evaluation of work schedule (SEWS) takes account of the fact that every social role has both rewarding and problematic aspects. In the same study, a measure of SEWS developed for reduced-hours employees was a significant predictor of two stress-related QOL indicators (life satisfaction and positive effect), whereas number of hours worked per se was not (Barnett & Gareis, 2000b). As a set, the findings on these three subjective indicators underscore the need to move beyond an exclusive focus on objective indicators of hours worked per se and to consider the direct and indirect effects of subjective aspects of work hours if we are to understand the relationship between work time and outcomes. More generally, in a major review, Perry-Jenkins, Repetti, and Crouter (2000) underscore the need for research to incorporate subjective indicators. They conclude that the relationship between chronic workplace stressors and outcomes was only observed when an individual well-being mediator was in the model. Couple-Level Analyses Full appreciation of the effects of work hours on outcomes requires the acknowledgment that most employees operate within dyads. In other words, outcomes need to be conceptualized at the couple level and assessed for both

110

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

the employee and the partner. Studies that fail to do so may underestimate the effects, negative or positive, of work hours. For example, the magnitude and the direction of the gap between the work hours of marital partners may be stronger predictors of mental health outcomes than the absolute work hours of each partner (Barnett, 2005). In addition, the use of couple data permits analyses of within-couple crossover effects (e.g., his work hours may affect her outcomes and vice versa). In a previous cross-sectional study, husbands’ and wives’ subjective evaluations of their work schedules (i.e., own schedule fit) was seen to affect their spouses’ outcomes (Gareis, Barnett, & Brennan, 2003). For some couples, long total family work hours (TFWH) may entail more rewards (e.g., higher income, better benefits, more security) than concerns, whereas for others, long TFWH may entail more drawbacks (e.g., spouse dissatisfaction and marital tension). In the first systematic longitudinal analysis of the separate effects of work hours and income on physical health, Stolzenberg (2001) found that within couples, the pecuniary benefits of husbands’ employment affected wives’ health over a three-year period, whereas the nonpecuniary aspects of wives’ employment affected husbands’ health over the same period. Among husbands, those whose wives worked 40+ h per week reported poorer health than those whose wives worked fewer hours. These findings underscore the importance of disentangling the pecuniary and nonpecuniary aspects of work hours by estimating the effect of income. Stolzenberg’s findings also suggest that the crossover effects of one spouse’s work hours on the other spouse’s health outcomes will be moderated by gender. However, these conclusions need to be treated tentatively because, as is true in many studies of two-earner couples, data on both spouses were gathered from only one spouse (Stolzenberg, 2001), clearly a less desirable procedure than collecting data from both spouses. In dual-earner couples, the number of hours the wife works affects the division of household labor. Studies suggest that when women work less than full-time and their husbands work full-time, there is a re-gendering of the division of household labor. Compared to their full-time employed peers, professional women who reduce their work hours do more low-control-household tasks such as meal preparation and cleanup (Barnett & Shen, 1997; Lundgren & Barnett, 2000). Overall, these women report a more traditional division of household tasks, more psychological distress, fewer career opportunities, and less work success (Hill, Martinson, & Ferris, 2004). Using a longitudinal design and couple data, Johnson (2004) reported a relationship between work hours and probability of divorce. Among dualearner couples in which both spouses are highly attached to the labor force,

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

111

the divorce rate was slightly lower than for the general population. Having both husband and wife work very long hours may not be as detrimental to a marriage as having one member of the couple work long hours. In a less restricted sample, for men, there was no consistent relationship between work hours and divorce probability. For women, the probability of divorce increased with hours worked. However, this conclusion must be qualified in a number of ways. Importantly, women who work low hours (i.e., five or fewer) are much less likely to get divorced, presumably because of financial constraints. Further, work hours for women may be used as a means to avoid marital difficulties at home and as a mechanism to provide financial insurance in anticipation of divorce. Moreover, the presence of children is likely to make additional work hours by women more costly to the marriage. It is possible that high hours worked by wives may cause divorces, but it is also likely that women who are more likely to divorce are also more likely to work high hours. Results from another study (Sayer & Bianchi, 2000), however, challenge these findings. In a logistic regression that included husbands’ and wives’ gender-role ideology and marital quality, neither wives’ nor husbands’ work hours per week or per year were significantly related to marital disruption.

Study of Total Family Work Hours In a recently completed analysis, we estimated the relationship between couple work hours variously defined and outcomes both cross-sectionally and longitudinally over three time points. This study was based on a provocative hypothesis that in predicting work/family conflict it is more informative to conceptualize work hours at the couple level (i.e., TFWH) than at the individual level (Jacobs & Gerson, 2001). The TFWH conceptualization implies that to fully understand the relationship between work hours and outcomes, one needs to employ a within-couples research design. As a concept, TFWH has considerable face validity: ‘‘married individuals have less time to spend at home, because they devote more joint time to work’’ (Jacobs & Gerson, 2001, p. 50). As mentioned earlier, in 2002, dualearner couples worked a combined 82 h per week (Bond et al., 2003). Within these couples, long hours translate into little time for health maintenance, household tasks, child care, and leisure activities (Pate et al., 1995). By implication, a likely consequence of long family work time is deteriorating outcomes for both partners. If this hypothesis is correct, a large number of U.S. families is at risk for stress-related problems; as of 2000, dual-earner

112

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

couples represented a solid majority (60%) of all married couples (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004). Moreover, given that women in these couples do a disproportionate share of the unpaid family work (e.g., Lewis & Cooper, 1999; Lundberg & Frankenhaeuser, 1999), it is likely that the costs of TFWH on outcomes will be greater for women. Following the recommendation of Frone, Russell, and Cooper (1992), we expanded the Jacobs and Gerson focus on work/family conflict by including three additional outcomes (i.e., marital-role quality, parent-role quality, and psychological distress). Moreover, although not explicitly stated as part of the Jacobs and Gerson hypothesis, we estimated the within-couple crossover effects of individual work hours on each outcome. For example, does change over time in the husband’s work hours impact change over time in the wife’s marital-role quality? We tested our hypotheses in a random sample of 211 dual-earner couples (N ¼ 422 individuals) who were parents or became parents over the course of the study and who lived in one of two Boston suburbs. Each partner was interviewed extensively three times over a two-year period. We expanded on the Jacobs and Gerson conceptualization of couple-level work hours by creating variables representing the time-invariant (i.e., averaged over time) and time-varying components of (1) each partner’s own work hours; (2) the sum of both partners’ work hours, or TFWH; (3) the difference between the two partners’ work hours; and (4) each partner’s proportion of TFWH. The data were analyzed using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM), a strategy that retains the couple membership of the participants, takes into account correlated outcomes within couples, and permits an explicit test for the moderating effect of gender. Two time-varying covariates were incorporated into the models: change over time in household income per capita and change over time in number of children. In addition to gender, timeinvariant covariates included the age and educational attainment of each spouse at the first wave of data collection, the negative affectivity score for each participant averaged across the first two waves of data collection, and the per capita household income (logged) averaged across the three waves of data collection.

What do the Data Show? Across the three waves of data collection, the men worked 48 h per week on average, ranging up to 78 h per week, whereas the women worked 37 h per week on average, ranging up to 70 h per week. Almost one-fifth (18%) of the participants had a second job at the first wave of data collection. In 78% of

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

113

the couples, the husband averaged more work hours than the wife across the three waves of data collection. In the remainder of the couples, the wife averaged more hours than the husband (19%) or the spouses averaged the same number of hours (3%). The main finding of this analysis was that, both cross-sectionally and longitudinally, TFWH per se was a weak predictor of outcomes. Specifically, only with work–family conflict as the outcome and only in the timevarying analysis was there an effect of TFWH. As TFWH increased over time, his perception of his work–family conflict increased. The same effect was not found for wives. However, neither the time-varying nor the timeinvariant component of TFWH was related to any of the other outcomes of interest, namely, psychological distress, marital-role quality, and parent-role quality. With respect to these other outcomes, it may be that for some couples, long TFWH entail more rewards (e.g., higher income, better benefits, more security) than concerns (e.g., too little time for spouse and children), whereas for other couples, the opposite is true. At the individual level, however, there were some effects of work hours. In some cases changes in one spouse’s work hours affected that same spouse’s outcomes, in other cases, changes in one spouse’s work hours affected the other spouse’s outcomes. Interestingly, there were more effects of changes in her work hours on his outcomes than effects of changes in his work hours on hers. And as her work hours increased, her husband’s psychological distress, marital-role quality, and parent-role quality also increased. And as her work hours increased, her parent-role quality increased as did her work–family conflict and her distress. These findings contrast with those of Galambos and Walters (1992), who found that wives’ longer work hours are associated with negative outcomes for husbands. We found one negative effect, but two positive effects, of wives’ increasing work hours on husbands. In contrast, there were no relationships between change over time in his work hours and his outcomes. With respect to husbands, his work hours affected his work–family conflict, and changes in his work hours affected only her marital-role quality. The more hours he worked, on average, the greater his perceptions of work– family conflict. And as his work hours increased, her marital-role quality decreased. Thus, as he spent more and more time at work, his wife’s evaluation of the quality of the marital relationship decreased. However, as her work hours increased, as described above, unexpectedly, his marital-role increased. It has been argued that women reduce their work hours when their family relationships are troubled (Barnett & Gareis, 2002). Perhaps, she is able to work ever longer hours as his marital-role quality increases.

114

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

The crossover findings, along with the single significant finding for TFWH discussed above, support the Jacobs and Gerson (2001) hypothesis that the couple needs to be the unit of analysis in considering the effect of work hours on work–family conflict. The finding that as her work hours increased over time, both her and his parent-role quality increase was also unexpected. As just described, one interpretation is that she may be freed up to work longer hours as her relationship with the children improves or becomes less troubled. Previous research indicates that mothers’ more than fathers’ work hours are sensitive to family variables (Barnett & Rivers, 1996; Glass & Estes, 1997; Lyness & Judiesch, 2001). Mothers are more likely than fathers to adjust their work schedule in response to family demands. Troubled relationships with children would be one such demand. When those relationships are positive, mothers may increase their work hours. It appears that fathers’ relationships with their children also benefit when mothers work longer hours. Perhaps, the improvements in mother–child relationships that permit mothers to work longer hours also have a salutary effect on father’s relationships with their children. Alternatively, the more hours she spends at work, the more time he has alone with the children to share activities and increase closeness. These mixed TFWH results are in line with previous studies, some of which reported positive and others of which reported negative linkages between individual work hours and negative outcomes (e.g., Barnett et al., 1995; Bird & Fremont, 1991; Herold & Waldron, 1985; Hughes & Galinsky, 1994). However, of the work hours linkages we did find, more were with negative than positive outcomes. Thus, there is little support for the widely held belief that work hours, whether conceptualized as an individual-level or as a couple-level variable, is a strong and consistent predictor of outcomes. There is, of course, the chance that with a different sample (e.g., singleemployed parents) and/or with other outcomes, work hours would be a more consistent predictor. How are we to Understand the Counterintuitive Findings? As has been argued elsewhere (e.g., Barnett, 1998), a focus on the number of hours worked per se may divert attention away from the meaning of work hours. Considerable evidence suggests that a full understanding of the impact of work hours on outcomes requires attention to how employees feel about the number of hours they work. Some employees may enjoy their work schedules; others may not. Within couples, high TFWH may be experienced positively for some and negatively for others. Combining data from employees who differ in their evaluation of their work hours may lead

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

115

to null findings. Thus, the failure to find many meaningful associations between TFWH and the four study outcomes may be due to these unmeasured and potentially offsetting effects. Other studies, to be discussed below, suggest that the distribution of work hours is a more potent predictor of outcomes than is the absolute number of hours worked (Colligan & Rosa, 1990; Presser, 2000). For example, among shift workers, night, evening, and rotating shifts are far more disruptive of family outcomes than is the day shift (Presser, 2000). Moreover, within couples it may be important to examine the degree of overlap in spouses’ work schedules. Nock and Kingston (1984) proposed a measure of the number of hours each day that at least one spouse is at work along with a complementary measure of ‘‘off-scheduling,’’ or the number of hours each day that only one spouse is at work. While the notion of the magnitude and direction of the difference between spouses’ work hours is indirectly related to such off-scheduling, as we shall see below, the extent of nonoverlap is an important predictor of such QOL outcomes as marital disruption.

DISTRIBUTION OF WORK HOURS The general consensus is that ‘‘beyond the amount of time a job extracts, the...timing of work also shape[s] how a job affects life at home’’ (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004, p. 94).

The Current Situation As employees and consumers, we are all aware of the benefits and costs of the 24/7 economy. We can buy groceries at any time of the day and any day of the week. Shopping malls are often open until 9 p.m. or later every night. Similarly, fast-food restaurants are open well into the evening. Police, firefighters, transportation workers, security forces, all work around the clock. To fill the seemingly endless need for continuous services requires that many employees work nonstandard schedules. Demographics Work schedules have two components: shift schedules; that is, the specific hours worked per day, and work days, or the days worked per week. The standard work week is defined as 35–40 h per week during the daytime, Monday through Friday (Presser, 2004). Only a minority (30%) of employed

116

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

Americans work standard work hours: 26% of men and 33% of women. Most employees’ (70%) work hours are not during the day, or they work at least one weekend day, or both. If we omit the restrictions on the number of hours worked, a bare majority of Americans (54%) work day hours Monday through Friday. In other words, by this definition, 46% of employed Americans work other than a standard workweek, 47% of men and 44% of women (Presser, 2004). Shifts also vary in other ways; they can differ in length and in rotation. For example, shifts can last, 8, 10, or 12 h. And many employees work rotating rather than fixed shifts (e.g., Folkard & Akerstedt, 2004; Folkard & Lombardi, 2004). Moreover, these rotations can be fast (e.g., shift changes once per week) or slow (e.g., shift changes every two, three, or four weeks) and they can rotate either clockwise (i.e., from day to evening to night) or counterclockwise (i.e., from night to evening to day). Although each of these variations may be associated with outcomes, for the purposes of this chapter, we focus only on the relationship between the day, evening, and night shifts (regardless of the length of the shift) and outcomes. In general, segments of the U.S. population who are more socially and economically disadvantaged are most likely to work nonstandard schedules, although many of the advantaged also work these schedules. Moreover, younger workers are more likely than older workers to have a nonstandard work schedule. Interestingly, education does not show a linear relationship to nonstandard work schedules (Presser, 2004). Both the poorly educated and the well educated are found to work such schedules, perhaps for different reasons. Finally, single mothers are more likely than married mothers to work nonstandard schedules. In addition, shift workers tend to be clustered within certain occupations, and, as a group, they are in relatively low-paid service jobs. The top 10 occupations for those working nonstandard hours include cashiers, truck drivers, commodities sales workers in retail and personal services, and wait staff – all service-sector jobs. Moreover, future job growth in the U.S. is projected to be disproportionately high in these very occupations. Thus, it is likely that the number of people working nonstandard schedules will increase in the decades ahead – and that this growth will disproportionately involve more women, and to a lesser extent, more blacks and Hispanics (Presser, 2004). With respect to gender, although the U.S. labor force is highly sex segregated, with men and women having very different occupational distributions, gender differences in work schedules among all those employed in 1997 were small (Presser, 2004). For example, with regard to shift schedules, men were only slightly more likely than women to work other than fixed daytime schedules (21% and 19%, respectively) and there was no gender difference in

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

117

the prevalence of evening work (both 8%). Although most differences were small, there were some gender differences of note: (1) A higher percentage of men than women work fixed nights or variable and rotating hours; and (2) Women more often than men work part-time (Messing, 2004). As for work days, men were only slightly more likely than women to work other than a five-day workweek, Monday through Friday (40% and 39%, respectively). Men and women who either work part-time or long hours (i.e., more than 40 h per week), were most likely to work on the weekends. Among all dual-earner couples, the prevalence of nonstandard schedules is high both for those with children and those without children (Presser, 2004). Just over one-quarter of all dual-earner couples include at least one spouse who works other than a fixed day schedule. In only 12% of shiftworking couples did both spouses work the same shift (i.e., evening, night, or rotating). In addition, the younger the age of spouses, the lower their education, and the greater the number of children, the higher the percentage working nonstandard schedules. The age of the child also has important effects on the likelihood of working nonstandard hours. For example, over one-third of all couples with children under five include a spouse who works nonstandard hours, and almost one-half include a spouse who works weekends. This notably high prevalence is even higher for those couples of relatively low family income (o $50,000): Over two-fifths include a spouse who works nonstandard hours and over one-half include a spouse who works weekends (Presser, 2004). Among full-time employed dual-earner couples, the picture is about the same – 25% have at least one spouse working other than a fixed day schedule (Presser, 2004). The percentages increase if the couple have children, especially young children (Presser, 2004). About three-fifths (59.8%) of dual-earner couples with children under five had at least one spouse working nonstandard hours, weekends, or both. Among full-time employed dual-earner couples, the percentages are somewhat lower, but the pattern is the same. Finally, the combination of having children and earning a low income produces the highest prevalence. In general, there is a remarkably high percentage of dual-earner couples in which one spouse is working a nonstandard schedule. Finally, it is important to note that these trends in the distribution of work hours are not limited to U.S. workers: ‘‘Other countries are following the American pattern’’ (Presser, 2004, p. 46). In particular, many Europeans are working ‘‘atypical’’ and rotating shifts. And, as in the United States, European parents are participating fully in nonday employment: ‘‘For employed parents, the percentages differ only slightly from those for all employed’’ (Presser, 2004, p.47).

118

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

Research Status In spite of these dramatic statistics, most research on work hours focuses only on the total number of hours worked and fails to consider the distribution of these hours. One consequence is that study participants may vary in when they work during either the 24-h day or the 7-day week. To the extent that the distribution of work hours affects the relationship between work hours and outcomes, this limitation may account for many of the inconsistent or nonsignificant results detailed above. One problem unique to the study of nonstandard work schedules is that the large number of variations in work schedules often makes it a practical necessity for researchers to combine data from workers on different shifts (e.g., White & Keith, 1990; Perry-Jenkins et al., in press). There is ample reason to believe that different nonstandard work schedules (e.g., weekend work and night shifts) are associated with different outcomes (Staines & Pleck, 1983; Presser, 2004), but because of inadequate sample sizes, researchers are often forced to group their study participants into only two categories: standard versus nonstandard work schedules. This analytic strategy, although often necessary, limits our understanding of the association between specific work schedules and outcomes. Another issue is that within certain occupations (e.g., nursing), the nature of the work varies from shift to shift. For example, nurses working the night shift (i.e., 11 p.m. to 7 a.m.) handle far fewer discharges than nurses working the day shift (7 a.m. to 3 p.m.) and evening shift (3 p.m.–11 p.m.). At the same time, staffing levels are lower during the night shift, raising the possibility that nurses will have to cover more patients than nurses who work day or evening shifts. Clearly, to identify the linkages between nonstandard work schedules per se (i.e., day, evening, and night shifts) and the outcomes of interest, one need to take into account such differences in job conditions. Also, mirroring the research on total number of hours, the unit of analysis in most studies linking nonstandard work schedules to outcomes has until recently been the individual worker. Even when investigators have focused on both members of dual-earner couples, they have almost without exception collected data from just one partner. Thus, when the husband is the study participant, he provides data on his own and his wife’s outcomes; when the wife is the subject, she provides data on her own and her husband’s outcomes. Obviously, the results of such studies would be more informative if data were collected from both members of the couple. Most extant research has focused exclusively on negative outcomes associated with nonstandard work hours. However, Staines and Pleck (1983), in a major and innovative study of the impact of work schedules on the

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

119

family, considered positive as well as negative outcomes of nonstandard work schedules. (This break with tradition parallels the inclusion of positive outcomes in more recent studies of the relationship between the total number of hours worked and outcomes, as discussed above.) Their innovation yielded interesting and prescient results (see, e.g., Totterdell, Spelten, Smith, Barton, & Folkard, 1995; Presser, 2004). Nonstandard work schedules were associated with both positive and negative outcomes. Specifically when wives worked nonday compared to day shifts, husbands spent more time on housework and child care; however, these couples also reported more work–family conflict. For couples in which at least one partner works a nonday shift, there may be considerable nonoverlap in their work hours. The degree of nonoverlap affects the amount of time they are at home together, which, in turn, affects the time available for relationship building as well as affecting the division of labor within the home. There is a general consensus that the degree of nonoverlap in work schedules is an important variable in the study of dualearning shiftworking couples (Kingston & Nock, 1985; Nock & Kingston, 1984). For example, the effects of maternal shiftwork on mothers’ health, well-being, and family functioning may vary with the degree of nonoverlap between their and their husband’s work schedules (Han, Waldfogel, & Brooks-Gunn, 2001). Nonoverlap may also have effects on the marital relationship and child-care arrangements, as discussed below (Presser, 2000). Finally, most studies do not distinguish between employees who work nonstandard shifts on a voluntary versus an involuntary basis (Bohle & Tilley, 1998; Presser, 1995; Warren & Johnson, 1995). Yet, these two groups most likely differ in ways that may be related to health outcomes. For example, inexperienced workers may be required to work undesirable shifts, whereas skilled workers may have more discretion over which shifts they work (Office of Technology Assessment, 1991). In one study, the negative health effects of night-shift work were moderated by the freedom to choose one’s own shift (Harrington, 1994).

Nonstandard Work Schedules and Outcomes Until recently, most systematic studies linking nonstandard work schedules to outcomes have been conducted on male workers and have focused primarily on negative mental and physical health outcomes. Now that increasing numbers of women are working such schedules (Fredriksen-Goldsen & Scharlach, 2001), researchers have broadened their focus to study a wider

120

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

range of outcomes in female as well as male workers and, more recently, in the whole shiftworking family. Individual-Level Analyses Among men, the negative effects of shiftwork, especially night and rotating shifts, include sleep disturbance, fatigue, gastrointestinal ailments, reduced ability to concentrate, high frequency of headaches, and substance use/ abuse (i.e., high consumption of cigarettes, caffeine, and other stimulants) (Circadian Technologies, 2003; Office of Technology Assessment, 1991). In a recent major review focusing on physical health outcomes, Messing (2004) noted that night work, more common among men than women, is associated with heart disease and other illnesses. With respect to QOL, most male shift workers report that shiftwork leads to a decrease in their own functioning in the family, due most likely to spillover of mood from the end of the shift to home. Other studies report that among men, negative effects of shiftwork included role conflict between the father and husband roles and the role of shift worker, low self-esteem, and anxiety (for a review, see Agervold, 1976). The reasons employees work nonstandard schedules appear to affect the relationship between these schedules and outcomes. Do employees voluntarily work these hours? Or, are the employees required by their jobs to do so? To the extent that such schedules are voluntarily chosen, the likelihood of negative outcomes is reduced. However, most people who work nonstandard hours do so involuntarily. The large majority give job rather than personal or family considerations as their main reason for doing so (Presser, 2004). These reasons include the inability to get any other job, the hours being mandated by the employer, or the nature of the job requiring nonstandard hours. For example, many registered nurses work evening and night shifts because the hospitals they work in mandate rotating shifts for all nurses or because only nurses with long tenure are eligible for day-shift schedules. The personal or familial reasons given include being able to make better child-care arrangements by working nonstandard hours, a reason that was mentioned by 6% of nonstandard schedule workers – both mothers and fathers. An even smaller minority of those working nonstandard hours gave better pay as a reason. According to Presser (2004), despite the fact that nonstandard schedules may be undesirable for most workers, they are not as a group rewarded with higher hourly pay (at least not in the U.S.). A fraction of these workers reported that they worked shifts because of the easier commute, and somewhat higher percentages (particularly among

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

121

those without children) said that their late shifts allowed time for them to attend school. Because the reasons employees work nonstandard schedules can affect the relationship between those work schedules and outcomes, researchers need to take reasons into account. Numerous studies of male shift workers conducted since the 1970s, both in the U.S. and abroad, report that those on nonstandard shifts express negative attitudes toward shiftwork and would prefer working day shifts, other things being equal. Comparatively less attention has been paid to the impact that shiftwork has on employees’ feelings about their family life and the effects that those feelings have on employee outcomes. In one important exception, Tasto, Colligan, Skjei, and Polly (1978) measured social disruption in their study of day-, evening-, night-, and rotating-shift registered nurses and licensed practical nurses. The main effects of the different shifts varied somewhat depending upon the particular outcome considered, but generally, day shifts were least and rotating shifts were most disruptive. It is reasonable to assume that such feelings affect (i.e., moderate) the relationship between nonstandard work schedules and outcomes. A fuller discussion of indirect effects is presented below. Couple-Level Analyses Interestingly, in comparison to the research linking number of hours to outcomes, the literature linking nonstandard work schedules to outcomes has more often taken a systems approach. Thus, there are many more within-couples studies in this body of literature. Most employees live in dyads and the effects of each partner’s work schedule impact the other partner’s outcomes, as noted earlier. Several studies suggest that the timing of labor force activity greatly affects the temporal coordination of family life, which, in turn, may have negative or positive impacts on family welfare. However, negative consequences seem more frequent, at least among the consequences that have been considered, which include decreased marital quality and increased marital disruption. Overall, it appears that among full-time shiftworking employees, night, evening, and rotating shifts are far more disruptive of family outcomes than is the day shift (Presser, 2000). It also appears that short-term advantages may be offset by long-term disadvantages. One such advantage is that fathers may spend more time with their children in the evenings if the mothers work nonday shifts. Another is that they may do more household chores. One disadvantage, mentioned above, is the extent of nonoverlap in work schedules within couples. According to the May 1997 Current Population Survey, in over one-fourth of dual-earner couples, at least one spouse

122

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

worked a nonday or a rotating shift (Presser, 2004), resulting in considerable nonoverlap in work schedules. In such couples, wives were employed an average of 10.8 hours per week when their husbands were not employed, and husbands were employed an average of 21.2 h when their wives were not employed. There was no overlap at all in employment hours for 8% of dualearner couples (Presser, 2004). Temporal coordination is also an issue in families in which only one spouse (typically the father) works a nonstandard schedule and the other spouse is nonemployed (e.g., Hertz & Charlton, 1989). These families can accommodate to the worker’s out-of-sync schedule in one of two ways: either they accommodate to the worker but live out of sync with the world, or they accommodate to the world and live out of sync with the worker (Hattery, 2001). In general, the accommodative strategy families adopt varies with the age of their children. According to Hattery (2001), when children are young, families tend to live out-of-sync with the world but in sync with the worker. However, once the child reaches school age, families with a nonday shift worker tend to live in sync with the world but out-of-sync with the worker (p. 420). Among the most obvious and common negative consequences of these patterns for families is the lack of time the spouses have to spend with one another. This structural deviance is often accompanied by a psychological deviance. Husbands and wives in many shiftworking couples compare themselves to what they think of as ‘‘normal’’ families (Presser, 2004), families who do things together, including socializing, recreation, and just getting to know each other. With respect to marital quality and marital disruption, the overall pattern among all dual-earner couples is one of greater marital dissatisfaction when either the husband or the wife works a nonday shift compared with their both working day shifts (Deutsch, 1999; Grosswald, 2004; Han, 2004; Jacobs & Gerson, 2004; Presser, 2000, 2004). Strikingly, the odds of marital disruption are 2.5 times higher when wives work fixed nights than when wives work fixed day shifts. Importantly, the finding that either spouse’s night shifts significantly increased the odds of marital instability held only for couples with children (Presser, 2004). The fact that nonstandard work schedules did not affect marital stability when couples had no children suggests that, in the absence of children, couples can cope with whatever stress such schedules generate. But when couples have children, nonstandard schedules complicate family life considerably, increasing the risk of separation and divorce. The greater risk of marital disruption that occurs with night shifts did not apply to evening-shift employment for either spouse. This finding is somewhat

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

123

surprising because when one spouse works evenings, the spouses typically are not together at dinner or for evening social events that occur on those workdays. These disadvantages may be offset by the fact that fathers are often more involved in the care of their children when the mother works evening shifts (Nock & Kingston, 1988). Although all shifts have both positive and negative aspects, it appears that the night shift, which entails very late hours of employment, most of them past midnight, adds special stress for couples with children. This holds for both men’s and women’s night work. It is also possible, of course, that employed parents in troubled marriages opt for working nights as a way of reducing the time they spend with their spouses. Is the high level of marital troubles and marital disruption found when the wife works nights due primarily to the limited amount of quality time that is available to the couple? Presser tested this hypothesis and found that the frequency of quality time together, while significantly associated with marital instability, was not the sole or even primary explanatory factor for why night shifts are linked to marital instability (Presser, 2004). She echoed other researchers in speculating that the changing nature of family life generated by different work schedules is the crucial issue. In the conclusion of their major study, Staines and Pleck (1983) speculated that the most severe problem faced by shift workers was not their lack of sufficient time for family activities, but rather that the time they had available for family roles was at the wrong period of the day. Often in shiftworking families, the schedules of family members do not mesh, resulting in workers’ reports of schedule conflict. A prime example of how lack of temporal coordination affects family life is that dual-earner shiftworking families are often unable to eat their meals together (Presser, 2004). For both mothers and fathers, the general pattern is that evening and rotating shifts generally decrease the frequency with which parents have dinner with their children. In contrast, certain nonstandard schedules increase breakfast time with children; e.g., evening schedules for married mothers, night and rotating shifts for married fathers. Overall, the family’s ability to eat together is ‘‘an especially important dayto-day ritual’’ that may be disrupted in families with shiftworking parents (Presser, 2004, p. 16). The division of household labor in shiftworking families has also received considerable empirical scrutiny. Unsurprisingly, being home alone – particularly during the day – appears to be an important factor increasing a spouse’s share of ‘‘traditionally female’’ household tasks, for both husbands and wives (Presser, 2004; Staines & Pleck, 1983). In general, the division of household labor in shiftworking families appears to have an asymmetric

124

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

effect on stereotypical-gendered behavior. The more hours husbands are not employed while wives are employed, the more likely husbands are to do housework that is traditionally done by females, thereby violating gender stereotypes. The same conclusion was drawn from a recent Australian study of shiftworking nurses. One researcher coined the phrase ‘‘the power of absence’’ (Moorehead, 2003) to mean that shiftwork enables some women to be absent from the home in the late afternoon and early evening, during peak periods of domestic work. Husbands and fathers are often therefore required to take up a much larger than usual domestic work load (Probert, 2005). In contrast, when wives are not at work and husbands are, wives tend to spend more hours on traditionally female tasks, thereby reinforcing gender stereotypes (Barnett & Shen, 1997; Presser, 2004). Interestingly, these patterns were seen among couples with and without children. The situation with respect to gender and household tasks is quite different in families in which the husbands work a nonday shift and their wives are unemployed. In these families, husbands make very few contributions to household labor. The challenge of managing child care for shiftworking couples begins as soon as they have their first child. Almost 40% of mothers worked nonstandard hours at some point in the first three years of their child’s life, and more than a third of mothers worked nonstandard hours in the first month of the child’s life (Han, 2004). How do these couples manage child care? Recent research suggests, as one would expect, that child-care patterns vary with the mother’s work schedule. For example, less than 15% of children with full-time employed mothers working a standard schedule were cared for by their fathers, but this figure rose to more than 40% in the case of children whose mothers worked nonstandard hours (Han, 2004; Presser, 1988). According to Presser (1986), among full-time employed married mothers who work nondays, the father is the predominant nonmaternal caregiver. In general, care of children by grandparents or other relatives is substantially greater when mothers work nonstandard rather than standard hours, with a much higher prevalence of paternal care among married mothers and grandmother care among unmarried mothers (Presser, 1986). Over time, these informal care arrangements tend to be more unreliable than such other types of arrangements as child-care centers and, hence, may be stressful for mothers (Heymann, 2000). Thus, the short-term advantage provided by heightened paternal or extended-family child care may be offset by several long-term disadvantages (Presser, 2004). These stresses may, in turn, affect outcomes. The situation is vastly different for single-earner/stay-at-home-parent families. Often nonemployed mothers whose spouses work nonday shifts

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

125

feel like single parents (Hattery, 2001). Typically, they are responsible for virtually all of the daily care of the children, including discipline, health care needs, and school-related activities. Moreover, they have to arrange their children’s schedules so that the kids can spend as much time as possible with their fathers. Among two-earner couples, the specific shift the mother works has the most dramatic effects on child-care arrangements. When the mother is employed and the children are very young, she may choose to work the night shift so that she can be there for the children before and after school and so that the couple can provide child care without relying on outside caretakers (Garey, 1999). When mothers and fathers work nonoverlapping shifts, they can increase the number of hours per day during which at least one parent is available to the children. This option is seen as desirable by many couples because it permits the wife both to work and to meet her own expectations of the ‘‘good’’ mother (Garey, 1999). Such nontraditional work shifts provide an opportunity for increased parental coverage of child care. When wives work nights, both husband and wife share child care; however, as we shall see, their child-care burdens are far from equal. With both partners working and returning home to solo parenting, both spouses are operating as if they were single parents. For example, when the couple has preschool-age children and he works days and she works nights, the youngsters are asleep for most of the time that he is home. In contrast, she returns home as her husband is leaving for his day-shift job and the children are wide awake. Not only is her child-care burden much heavier, she is likely to be sleep deprived. She can either try to get some sleep while the children are awake – an undesirable situation – or she can wait until her husband gets home before going to sleep. In either case, she gets little uninterrupted sleep and has essentially no leisure time. In this way, employed mothers in dual-shiftworking couples can feel unduly burdened. If this burden feels inequitable, it may contribute to stress and eventually to health and QOL problems. The divisions of child care changes when the children are school age. It appears that fathers whose wives work in the evenings compensate for their wives’ work schedules (Nock & Kingston, 1988). For example, every hour she works after 6 p.m. is associated with an estimated increase of about 18 min in the father’s time with children. However, wives’ work time at other time periods had no such effect on the father’s time with children. Thus, there may be benefits for evening-shiftworking mothers (as well as the husbands and children), if this work schedule results in fathers and children spending more time alone together. However, if fathers are unreliable or

126

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

reluctant, these arrangements may add to mothers’ anxiety. In contrast, dayshiftworking mothers and their children may benefit if the mothers’ shifts allow them to be home in time to spend after-school hours with their children. New evidence suggests that evening shifts may create particular problems for parents of school-age children. As Heymann (2000) notes, ‘‘parents who do evening work clearly have less time to spend with their school-age children...the parent who works from 3 p.m. to 9 p.m. may rarely see the schoolage child awake during the week’’ (p. 49). Moreover, the evening shift is the most common nonstandard shift, accounting for 40% of all nonstandard shifts among full-time employed workers (Heymann, 2000). Evening shiftworking parents, mothers and fathers, may be at high risk for stress associated with their absence from the home when their children are out of school (Barnett & Gareis, 2006). Evidence suggests that such parental afterschool stress (PASS) is associated with diminished psychological well-being for employed fathers as well as mothers. In sum, the prevalence of nonstandard work schedules has produced a new ‘‘home time’’ family structure for many Americans, particularly the working poor: Spouses are often not at home together in the evening or at night, and parents are often not home at such times with their children (Presser, 2004). One common pattern is for the husbands of night-shift workers to work days. These couples are the most extreme example of nonoverlap. As Presser (1988) comments, ‘‘shiftwork among dual earners increases work/family conflict, specifically with regard to scheduling problems’’ (p. 146). Of particular concern, as noted above, is that among these couples there is virtually no overlap between their work schedules. On the positive side, the father is home to supervise the children in the evenings, which may be especially important to mothers when the children are school age or older. These social and familial dislocations add to the physiological problems associated with shiftwork, producing a high likelihood of negative outcomes for men and women alike. Moreover, it seems that each of the three shifts has potential costs and benefits to mothers and fathers that may be differentially related to outcomes.

Study of Families with Shiftworking Mothers Although considerable data are now available on shiftwork and its links to outcomes, many questions remain. For example, no research has addressed the direct effects of nonstandard work schedules on outcomes among

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

127

full-time employed women in dual-earner couples who work the evening shift and have at least one school-age child. Although much more attention has been paid to the challenges faced by employed mothers with preschoolage children, many more employed mothers have school-age children, and arguably, the challenges for this group of mothers are even greater. Specifically, the availability of nonfamilial after-school child-care arrangements is far below demand. Moreover, school-age children face considerable risks if they are unsupervised after school. These risks include engaging in such unsafe behaviors as smoking, drinking, delinquency, truancy, and inappropriate sexual activities (Cohen, Farley, Taylor, Martin, & Schuster, 2002; Kurz, 2002; National Center for Schools & Communities, 1999; Newman, Fox, Flynn, & Christeson, 2000). Among evening shiftworking mothers, lack of availability of after-school care is hypothesized to result in heightened stress and negative outcomes. Thus, mothers who work evening shifts are thought to be at higher risk for outcomes than their day shiftworking counterparts. In addition, these effects are thought to crossover and have effects on their husbands’ outcomes. To test these hypotheses, we gathered data from a random sample of Boston-area female registered nurses who worked either day or evening shifts on a regular basis. All participants were married to a full-time employed husband and had at least one child who was at least eight years old but who had not started high school yet. The final sample consisted of 55 dual-earner families, 29 with a mother who regularly worked day shifts and 26 with a mother who regularly worked evening shifts. The nurses, their husbands, and all of their eligible children (N ¼ 183 individuals) were interviewed (the data from the children’s interviews are not reported in this chapter). In separate face-to-face interviews with the mothers and the fathers, we inquired about both the objective number of hours they worked and their subjective feelings about working those hours. Most (94%) of the families were white; the rest (6%) were Asian. Parents’ ages ranged from 32 to 56 years of age (Mean ¼ 42:7 for mothers; 44.0 for fathers). On average, couples had been married for 15.2 years (SD ¼ 4:8) and had between two and three children (Mean ¼ 2.5, SD ¼ 0.7, range ¼ 1–4). On average, mothers worked 35.2 h per week (SD ¼ 7.3) and fathers worked 45.2 h per week (SD ¼ 7.5). We estimated the within-couple relationship between two aspects of mothers’ workschedules: (1) day vs. evening shift, and (2) percentage of work hours that fall within the day shift (for day-shift nurses) or the evening shift (for evening-shift nurses) on the one hand and four outcomes (his and her psychological distress and his and her work–family conflict) on the other.

128

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

The covariates included each spouse’s work hours, the number of children at home, family income, and each spouse’s negative affectivity (i.e., a mood dispositional trait to experience the world negatively that is thought to create spuriously high correlations between predictors and outcomes, especially in studies that rely on self-report data). Because we had data from both partners in each couple, in addition to estimating the relationship linking the mother’s work schedule to each partner’s distress and work–family conflict, we were able to study the crossover effects of one partner’s work hours on the other partner’s outcomes (e.g., the effect of her work hours on his psychological distress). What do the Data Show? In preliminary analyses, mothers’ distress was not associated with the distribution (day vs. evening, percentage of work hours falling within the day or evening shift) or the number of her work hours, nor was it associated with her husband’s work hours. For fathers, psychological distress was negatively associated with his work hours and with his wife’s work hours (Barnett & Gareis, 2006). That is, among men married to wives working day or evening shifts, working longer hours and having a wife who works longer hours is associated with lower distress. Thus, within couples, the results differed for husbands and wives. His work hours affected his distress, whereas her work schedule had no such effect on her distress. The crossover effects were also asymmetrical: Her work schedule affected his distress, but his work schedule did not affect her distress. Mothers’ work–family conflict was associated with one aspect of her work schedule. Evening-shift mothers reported significantly higher levels of work– family conflict than did their day-shift counterparts. For fathers, surprisingly, working longer hours was associated with lower levels of work–family conflict. In addition, less surprisingly, having more children at home was associated with higher levels of work–family conflict, and there was a trend for higher family income to be negatively associated with work–family conflict, such that higher income predicted lower conflict. It is, of course, possible that this pattern of results would change with different outcomes. How are we to Understand these Counterintuitive Findings? Surprisingly, being at work while their children were out of school was not associated with high psychological distress among mothers who work evening shifts. One possible explanation is that the children are being cared for by the father or other family members, a common pattern noted by Presser (2004). Planned analyses will enable us to test this possible explanation. The findings

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

129

for the fathers suggest that they hold fairly nontraditional gender-role attitudes with respect to their wives’ role behaviors. The husbands showed no evidence of distress – and in fact showed less distress – when their wives worked longer hours, perhaps because of the economic and other benefits her employment confers on the family. There is also no evidence that husbands’ distress is related to the distribution of her hours (i.e., day vs. evening, percentage of work hours falling within the day or evening shift). Alternatively, there may be selective bias among the men. Anecdotal evidence suggests that men who marry nurses know in advance that their wives will have to work shifts and long hours. If this lifestyle is incompatible with their preferences, they may choose to marry someone with a more conventional work life or they may marry nurses, but their wives may seek nursing jobs in standard-schedule settings like doctor’s offices, schools, companies, or clinics, or they may leave the field of nursing, either temporarily or permanently. Not surprisingly, mothers who work evening shifts reported higher work– family conflict than their counterparts who work day shifts, regardless of the number of hours they work. Thus, it appears that the previously reported linkage between long work hours and work–family conflict (Gutek et al., 1991; Keith & Schafer, 1980; Marshall & Barnett, 1993; Moen & Yu, 2000; Staines & Pleck, 1983) may be due more to the distribution of work hours than to the absolute number of work hours. Even though day-shift workers are typically at work when their children leave for school in the morning, they are home when their children are out of school. As noted above, mothers may feel guilty when they are at work during the after-school hours even if the children are being cared for by the father (Perry-Jenkins, in press). Thus, mothers who work evening shifts might well experience considerable work–family conflict because they feel that they cannot simultaneously fulfill their work and family responsibilities. The findings are quite different for the husbands. To the extent that they define their role in the family as breadwinner then their working long hours would not conflict with their contribution to the family; hence, their work–family conflict would be low.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUDING REMARKS The main finding of this chapter is that the widely held assumption that long work hours inevitably lead to negative health and QOL outcomes is highly questionable. Further, long work hours appears to be a weak predictor of both negative and positive outcomes. One important reason is that the

130

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

absolute number of work hours fails to take into account the distribution of those hours. Arguably, the distribution of work hours has greater implications for outcomes than does the number of work hours per se. Demographic trends increase the urgency of incorporating work schedules into future research linking work hours to outcomes. Currently, about half of the U.S. workforce is employed during nonstandard hours. This figure is bound to increase because job growth is predicted to be in sectors in which nonstandard work shifts predominate. Other lessons to be drawn from this review concern methodological and analytic strategies that should be utilized in future research. It seems clear, for example, that cross-sectional studies have limited ability to further our understanding of the relationships of interest. In the wake of layoffs, mergers, and downsizings, it is clear that work hours are not a stable phenomenon: Today’s work hours and schedules may be poor predictors of tomorrow’s outcomes. Longitudinal studies that track workers’ schedules over time are needed to analyze the relationship between increases or decreases in work hours and changes in shift, which may turn out to be strong predictors of outcomes. And, of course, change in each spouse’s work schedule will likely have effects on the other spouse’s outcomes. Therefore, future research needs to take the couple (and perhaps the whole family) as the unit of analysis. It is noteworthy that almost no studies focus on the effects of nonstandard work schedules on child outcomes (see Strazdins, D’Souza, Lim, Broom, & Rodgers, 2004 for an exception). A narrow focus on the individual worker will undoubtedly underestimate the magnitude of the association between work hours and outcomes. And some effects (crossover effects) may never be found unless outcomes are assessed on both partners of the couple. Also, the inclusion of children into the sample would permit comparison with other bodies of literature suggesting linkages between certain parental job conditions (e.g., job autonomy), the quality of parent–child interactions, and child outcomes (e.g., Kohn, 1969; Menaghan & Parcel, 1995; Parcel & Menaghan, 1994a,b; Whitbeck et al., 1997). Another lesson to be drawn is that future research needs to include as many covariates as possible in order to disentangle the effects of work hours per se on outcomes. Only in this way are we likely to understand the unique contribution of work hours to outcomes net of the effect of factors with which work schedules are conflated. For example, because long-work-hours jobs are likely to provide employees with good access to health care and other benefits, which are in turn likely to be related to outcomes, access to benefits needs to be included as a covariate in future research designs. In this example, without controlling for access to benefits, it would not be possible

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

131

to conclude that any relationship between work hours and outcomes was ‘‘due’’ to work hours per se. Researchers need to include these and other job conditions in their analyses before drawing conclusions about the effect of work hours on outcomes. At the same time, the list of potential covariates is long and no one study can include them all. It is also clear from this review that researchers need to include subjective indicators of work schedules in their studies. There is substantial evidence that such indicators are stronger predictors of outcomes than are objective indicators. Subjective indicators can be conceptualized as predictors, covariates, moderators, or mediators. Specifically, one can estimate: (1) the direct effect of subjective indicators on outcomes; (2) the direct effect of objective indicators after controlling for subjective indicators; (3) whether the direct-effect relationship between the number or distribution of work hours and outcomes depends on subjective indicators; or (4) whether subjective indicators account for the relationship between objective work hours indicators and outcomes. More generally, another strong recommendation that grows out of this review is that future studies analyze indirect effects (moderation or mediation). Many demographic variables (e.g., sex, education, race, socioeconomic status, marital status, parental status) may moderate the relationships under consideration. This information would help employers identify those employees who are at high risk for negative outcomes and might therefore be most likely to benefit from targeted policy interventions. Other variables (e.g., SEWS and schedule fit) might mediate the relationship between work hours and outcomes. Another recommendation is that future research examines the impact of community resources on the linkages between work hours and outcomes. Communities vary in the extent to which they provide services to working families. These services can either ameliorate or exacerbate the relationship between work hours and outcomes. The stress on workers who clock long or nonstandard hours will be greatly reduced if child care is available during nonstandard hours, if the town provides supervised after-school programs, if public transportation is accessible when nonday shift workers need it, if medical appointments can be scheduled on weekends, and so forth. In the absence of available community services, employed parents must cobble together resources that are often unreliable and subject to breakdown. Much more needs to be understood about the effect of user-friendly community resources on the relationship between work hours and outcomes. Finally, most of the extant research has been done on samples of white, often middle-class, employees who are in dual-earner couples. And, most of

132

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

the studies have focused on a limited set of outcome variables. There is a great need to increase heterogeneity in both of these domains (Perry-Jenkins, Goldberg, Pierce, & Sayer, in press). For example, it may well be that work hours are a better predictor of outcomes in certain demographic groups. We cannot say, because we do not have the data. Racial and ethnic minorities need to be included, as do gay and lesbian couples, working class as well as working poor couples, and single-parent households headed by females and males (Perry-Jenkins, in press; Perry-Jenkins et al., 2000). Also, the range of outcomes studied needs to be expanded to include, among others, healthmaintenance behaviors (e.g., regular exercise, annual medical checkups, substance use), and child outcomes (psychosocial, cognitive, and behavioral). There is no a priori reason to believe that work hours or nonstandard work schedules will have similar effects on diverse outcomes, or on different employees, or on the spouses of employees. Finally, it is important to study couples at different stages of the life course. The relationship between the number and distribution of hours worked on outcomes may depend on whether the couple has children and on the ages of the children (Perry-Jenkins et al., in press; Presser, 2004). Given that the vast majority of adult Americans spend many hours each day year after year at work, there is a pressing need to better understand the impact of their ‘‘time’’ at work on their health and QOL.

REFERENCES Agervold, M. (1976). Shiftwork – a critical review. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 17, 181–188. Barnett, R. C. (1998). Toward a review and reconceptualization of the work/family literature. Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs, 124, 125–182. Barnett, R. C. (2004). Work hours as a predictor of stress outcomes. Paper presented at the long work hours, safety and health: Toward a national research agenda, April, University of Maryland Medical Center. Barnett, R. C. (2005). Dual-earner couples: Good/bad for her and/or him? In: D. F. Halpern & S. E. Murphy (Eds), From work-family balance to work-family interaction: Changing the metaphor (pp. 151–171). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Barnett, R. C., & Brennan, R. T. (1995). The relationship between job experiences and psychological distress: A structural equation approach. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 259–276. Barnett, R. C., & Brennan, R. T. (1997). Change in job conditions, change in psychological distress, and gender: A longitudinal study of dual-earner couples. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 253–274. Barnett, R. C., & Gareis, K. C. (2000a). Reduced-hours employment: The relationship between difficulty of trade-offs and quality of life. Work and Occupations, 27, 168–187.

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

133

Barnett, R. C., & Gareis, K. C. (2000b). Reduced-hours job-role quality and life satisfaction among married women physicians with children. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 358–364. Barnett, R. C., & Gareis, K. C. (2002). Full-time and reduced-hours work schedules and marital quality: A study of female physicians with young children. Work and Occupations, 29, 364–379. Barnett, R. C., & Gareis, K. C. (2005). The relationship between nonstandard work schedules, well-being, and quality-of-life indicators: A within-couple analysis. Paper presented at the 1st international conference: Community, work, and family: Change and transformation, March, Manchester, England. Barnett, R. C., & Gareis, K. C. (2006). Parental after-school stress and psychological wellbeing. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 101–108. Barnett, R. C., Gareis, K. C., & Brennan, R. T. (1999). Fit as a mediator of the relationship between work hours and burnout. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 307–317. Barnett, R. C., Raudenbush, S. W., Brennan, R. T., Pleck, J. H., & Marshall, N. L. (1995). Change in job and marital experiences and change in psychological distress: A longitudinal study of dual-earner couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 839–850. Barnett, R. C., & Rivers, C. (1996). She works/he works: How two-income families are happier, healthier, and better off. San Francisco: Harper. Barnett, R. C., & Shen, Y.-C. (1997). Gender, high- and low-schedule-control housework tasks, and psychological distress. Journal of Family Issues, 18, 403–428. Bird, C. E., & Fremont, A. M. (1991). Gender, time use, and health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 32, 114–129. Bohle, P., & Tilley, A. J. (1998). Early experience of shiftwork: Influences on attitudes. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 71, 61–79. Bond, J. T., Thompson, C., Galinsky, E., & Prottas, D. (2003). Highlights of the 2002 national study of the changing workforce (No. 3). New York: Families and Work Institute. Circadian Technologies (2003). 2003 Health study release. Lexington, MA: Circadian Technologies. Retrieved January 25, 2005, from http://www.circadian.com/media/ 2003_press_health.htm Cohen, D. A., Farley, T. A., Taylor, S. N., Martin, D. H., & Schuster, M. A. (2002). When and where do youths have sex? The potential role of adult supervision. Pediatrics, 6, 66. Colligan, M. J., & Rosa, R. R. (1990). Shiftwork effects on social and family life. Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews, 5, 315–322. Crohan, S. E., Antonucci, T. C., & Adelmann, P. K. (1989). Job characteristics and well-being at midlife: Ethnic and gender comparisons. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13, 223–235. Crouter, A. C., Bumpus, M. F., Head, M. R., & McHale, S. M. (2001). Implications of overwork and overload for the quality of men’s family relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 404–416. DeLille, B., & Lee, J. (2001). New ILO study shows US workers put in longest hours. Americans lead industrialized nations in labor productivity and are spending an extra week on the job each year. Retrieved February 7, 2005, from http://www.us.ilo.org/archive/press/ pressrelease/2001/20010831_kilm.cfm

134

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

Deutsch, F. M. (1999). Halving it all: How equally shared parenting works. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Emmons, C. A., Biernat, M., Tiejde, L. B., Lang, E. L., & Wortman, C. B. (1990). Stress, support, and coping among women professionals with preschool children. In: J. Eckenrode & S. Gore (Eds), Stress between work and family (pp. 61–93). New York: Plenum. Epstein, C. F., & Kalleberg, A. L. (2004). Fighting for time: Shifting boundaries of work and social life. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Folkard, S., & Akerstedt, T. (2004). Trends in the risk of accidents and injuries and their implications for models of fatigue and performance. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 75(Suppl. 1), A161–A167. Folkard, S., & Lombardi, D. A. (2004). Toward a risk index to assess work schedules. Chronobiology International: The Journal of Biological and Medical Rhythm Research, 21, 1063–1072. Fredriksen-Goldsen, K. I., & Scharlach, A. E. (2001). Families and work: New directions in the twenty-first century. New York: Oxford University Press. Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, L. M. (1992). Prevalence of work–family conflict: Are work and family boundaries asymmetrically permeable? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 723–729. Galambos, N. L., & Walters, B. J. (1992). Work hours, schedule inflexibility, and stress in dualearner spouses. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 24, 290–302. Gareis, K. C., & Barnett, R. C. (2002). Under what conditions do long work hours affect psychological distress? Work and Occupations, 29, 483–497. Gareis, K. C., Barnett, R. C., & Brennan, R. T. (2003). Individual and crossover effects of work schedule fit: A within-couple analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 1041–1054. Garey, A. I. (1999). Weaving work and motherhood. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Glass, J. L., & Estes, S. B. (1997). The family responsive workplace. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 289–313. Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of work– family enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31, 1–21. Grosswald, B. (2004). The effects of shift work on family satisfaction. The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 85, 413–423. Gutek, B. A., Searle, S., & Klepa, L. (1991). Rational versus gender role explanations for work– family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 560–568. Han, W.-J. (2004). Nonstandard work schedules and child care decisions: Evidence from the NICHD study of early child care. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 231–256. Han, W.-J., Waldfogel, J., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2001). The effects of early maternal employment on later cognitive and behavioral outcomes. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 336–354. Harrington, J. M. (1994). Shift work and health – a critical review of the literature on working hours. Annals Academy of Medicine, 23, 699–705. Hattery, A. J. (2001). Tag-team parenting: Costs and benefits of utilizing nonoverlapping shift work in families with young children. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 82, 419–427. Herold, J., & Waldron, I. (1985). Part time employment and women’s health. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 27, 405–412. Hertz, R., & Charlton, J. (1989). Making family under a shiftwork schedule: Air Force security guards and their wives. Social Problems, 36, 491–507.

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

135

Heymann, J. (2000). The widening gap: Why America’s working families are in jeopardy – and what can be done about it. New York: Basic Books. Hill, E. J., Martinson, V., & Ferris, M. (2004). New concept part-time employment as a work– family adaptive strategy for women professionals with small children. Family Relations, 53, 282–292. Hochschild, A. R. (1997). The time bind: When work becomes home and home becomes work. New York: Metropolitan. House, J. S., Strecher, V., Metzner, H. L., & Robbins, C. A. (1986). Occupational stress and health among men and women in the Tecumseh Community Health Study. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 27, 62–77. Hughes, D., & Galinsky, E. (1994). Gender, job and family conditions and psychological symptoms. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 251–270. Hughes, D., Galinsky, E., & Morris, A. (1992). The effects of job characteristics on marital quality: Specifying linking mechanisms. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 31–42. Hyde, J. S., Klein, M. H., Essex, M. J., & Clark, R. (1995). Maternity leave and women’s mental health. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 19, 257–285. Jacobs, J. A., & Gerson, K. (1997). The endless day or flexible office? Working hours, work– family conflict, and gender equity in the modern workplace. Report to Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. New York. Jacobs, J. A., & Gerson, K. (2001). Overworked individuals or overworked families? Explaining trends in work, leisure, and family time. Work and Occupations, 28, 40–63. Jacobs, J. A., & Gerson, K. (2004). The time divide: Work, family and gender inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Johnson, J. H. (2004). Do long work hours contribute to divorce? Topics in Economic Analysis & Policy, 4, 1–23. Kanter, R. M. (1977). Work and family in the United States: A critical review and agenda for research and policy. New York: Russell Sage. Keith, P. M., & Schafer, R. B. (1980). Role strain and depression in two-job families. Family Relations, 29, 483–488. Kingston, P. W., & Nock, S. L. (1985). Consequences of the family work day. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 619–629. Klein, M. H., Hyde, J. S., Essex, M. J., & Clark, R. (1998). Maternity leave, role quality, work involvement, and mental health one year after delivery. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 239–266. Kohn, M. L. (1969). Class and conformity: A study in values. New York: Dorsey. Kohn, M. L., & Schooler, C. (1982). Job conditions and personality: A longitudinal assessment of their reciprocal effects. American Journal of Sociology, 87, 1257–1286. Kurz, D. (2002). Caring for teenage children. Journal of Family Issues, 23, 748–767. Lewis, S., & Cooper, C. L. (1999). The work–family research agenda in changing contexts. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 382–393. Lowe, G. S., & Northcott, H. C. (1988). The impact of working conditions, social roles, and personal characteristics on gender differences in distress. Work and Occupations, 15, 55–77. Lundberg, U., & Frankenhaeuser, M. (1999). Stress and workload of men and women in highranking positions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 142–151. Lundgren, L., & Barnett, R. C. (2000). Reduced-hours careers in medicine: A strategy for the professional, community and family. Community, Work & Family, 3, 65–79.

136

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

Lyness, K. S., & Judiesch, M. K. (2001). Are female managers quitters? The relationships of gender, promotions, and family leaves of absence to voluntary turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1167–1178. Marshall, N. L., & Barnett, R. C. (1993). Work–family strains and gains among two-earner couples. Journal of Community Psychology, 21, 64–78. Menaghan, E. G., & Parcel, T. L. (1991). Determining children’s home environments: The impact of maternal characteristics and current occupational and family conditions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 417–431. Menaghan, E. G., & Parcel, T. L. (1995). Social sources of change in children’s home environments: The effects of parental occupational experiences and family conditions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 69–84. Messing, K. (2004). Physical exposures in work commonly done by women. Canadian Journal of Applied Physiology, 29, 639–656. Moen, P., & Yu, Y. (2000). Effective work/life strategies: Working couples, work conditions, gender, and life quality. Social Problems, 47, 291–326. Moorehead, A. (2003). How employed mothers allocate time for work and family. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. National Center for Schools and Communities. (1999). After-school programs: An analysis of need, current research, and public opinion. New York, NY: Fordham University. Negrey, C. (1993). Gender, time, and reduced work. Albany: State University of New York Press. Newman, S. A., Fox, J. A., Flynn, E. A., & Christeson, W. (2000). America’s after-school choice: The prime time for juvenile crime, or youth enrichment and achievement. Retrieved November 19th, 2004, from http://www.fightcrime.org/reports/as2000.pdf Nock, S. L., & Kingston, P. W. (1984). The family work day. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46, 333–343. Nock, S. L., & Kingston, P. W. (1988). Time with children: The impact of couples’ work-time commitments. Social Forces, 67, 59–85. Office of Technology Assessment. (1991). Biological rhythms: Implications for the worker. Washington, DC: Author. Parcel, T. L., & Menaghan, E. G. (1994a). Early parental work, family social capital, and early childhood outcomes. American Journal of Sociology, 99, 972–1009. Parcel, T. L., & Menaghan, E. G. (1994b). Parents’ jobs and children’s lives. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Pate, R. R., Pratt, M., Blair, S. N., Haskell, W. L., Macera, C. A., Bouchard, C., et al. (1995). Physical activity and public health: A recommendation from the centers for disease control and prevention and the American college of sports medicine. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273, 402–407. Perry-Jenkins, M. (2005). Work in the working class: Challenges facing workers and their families. In: S. M. Bianchi, L. M. Casper, K. E. Christensen & R. B. King (Eds), Work, family, health and well-being. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Perry-Jenkins, M., Goldberg, A., Pierce, C., & Sayer, A. (in press). Shift work, role overload, and the transition to parenthood. Journal of Marriage and Family. Perry-Jenkins, M., Repetti, R. L., & Crouter, A. C. (2000). Work and family in the 1990s. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 981–998. Piltch, C. A. (1992). Work and mental distress: A comparative analysis of the experiences of women and men. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University Professors Program, Boston University, Boston, MA.

Health and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

137

Presser, H. (1986). Shift work among American women and child care. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 551–563. Presser, H. (1988). Shift work and child care among young dual-earner American parents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 581–591. Presser, H. (1995). Job, family, and gender: Determinants of nonstandard work schedules among employed Americans in 1991. Demography, 32, 577–598. Presser, H. B. (2000). Nonstandard work schedules and marital instability. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 93–110. Presser, H. B. (2004). Employment in a 24/7 economy: Challenges for the family. In: A. Booth & A. C. Crouter (Eds), Work–family challenges for low-income parents and their children. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Probert, B. (2005). ‘I just couldn’t fit it in’: Gender and unequal outcomes in academic careers. Gender, Work and Organization, 12, 50–72. Robinson, J. P., Chenu, A., & Alvarez, A. S. (2002). Measuring the complexity of hours at work: The weekly work grid. Monthly Labor Review, 125, 44–54. Roehling, P. V., & Moen, P. (2003). Dual-earner couples: A Sloan Work and Family Encyclopedia entry. Retrieved January 8, 2005, from http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/wfnetwork/ rft/wfpedia/wfpDECent.html Sayer, L. C., & Bianchi, S. M. (2000). Women’s economic independence and the probability of divorce. Journal of Family Issues, 21, 906–943. Scharlach, A. E. (1994). Caregiving and employment: Competing or complementary roles? The Gerontologist, 34, 378–385. Schor, J. B. (1991). The overworked American: The unexpected decline of leisure. New York: Basic Books. Sparks, K., Cooper, C., Fried, Y., & Shirom, A. (1997). The effects of hours of work on health: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 70, 391–408. Staines, G. L., & Pleck, J. H. (1983). The impact of work schedules on the family. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan. Stolzenberg, R. M. (2001). It’s about time and gender: Spousal employment and health. American Journal of Sociology, 107, 61–100. Strazdins, L., D’Souza, R. M., Lim, L. L.-Y., Broom, D. H., & Rodgers, B. (2004). Job strain, job insecurity, and health: Rethinking the relationship. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 9, 296–305. Tasto, D. L., Colligan, M. J., Skjei, E. W., & Polly, S. J. (1978). Health consequences of shift work. NIOSH Technical Report No. PB80176563. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH. Totterdell, P., Spelten, E., Smith, L., Barton, J., & Folkard, S. (1995). Recovery from work shifts: How long does it take? Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 43–57. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2005). Average hours worked per day by employed persons on weekdays and weekends by selected characteristics, 2003 annual incomes. Retrieved January 31, 2005, from http://bls.gov/news.release/atus.t04.htm Verbrugge, L. M. (1989). The twain meet: Empirical explanations of sex differences in health and mortality. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 30, 282–304. Warren, J. A., & Johnson, P. J. (1995). The impact of workplace support on work–family role strain. Family Relations, 44, 163–169.

138

ROSALIND CHAIT BARNETT

Wethington, E., & Kessler, R. C. (1989). Employment, parental responsibility, and psychological distress: A longitudinal study of married women. Journal of Family Issues, 10, 527–546. Whitbeck, L. B., Simons, R. L., Conger, R. D., Wickrama, K. A. S., Ackley, K. A., & Elder, G. H., Jr. (1997). The effects of parents’ working conditions and family economic hardship on parenting behaviors and children’s self-efficacy. Social Psychology Quarterly, 60, 291–303. White, L., & Keith, B. (1990). The effect of shift work on the quality and stability of marital relations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 453–462.

WORK STRESS, COPING RESOURCES, AND MENTAL HEALTH: A STUDY OF AMERICA’S BLACK ELITE Pamela Braboy Jackson and Tiffani Saunders ABSTRACT This study explores the relationship between work stress, coping resources, and mental health. Utilizing data collected from a unique sample of professional African Americans (N ¼ 167), the study distinguishes between five forms of work stress (perceived discrimination, token stress, role overload, role conflict, and scrutiny) and several indicators of mental health (depression, anxiety, somaticism). The results show that token stress and role overload are more consistent predictors of mental health than any other form of work stress among Black elites. In terms of coping effectiveness, confrontation (e.g., seeking out someone who will listen) appears to be a beneficial strategy for handling work pressures. Forbearance (e.g., hiding one’s feelings) and avoidance (e.g., leaving a situation) strategies are related to poor mental health. There is additional evidence however, that confrontational styles of coping are not always conducive during times of elevated work stress, especially when Black elites are

Employee Health, Coping and Methodologies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 5, 139–169 Copyright r 2006 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(05)05004-3

139

140

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

faced with token stress. Optimistic comparisons, on the other hand, are useful coping resources among those elites who are dealing with high token stress and role overload.

INTRODUCTION The study of social stress has attracted the attention of medical sociologists since Selye (1956) demonstrated that stressful situations upset our body’s equilibrium, making us more susceptible to various diseases. Since that time, stress has been conceptualized as adjustment to life events, chronic stress/ strain, daily hassles, and major traumatic events (Pearlin, 1989; Turner & Lloyd, 1995). Among these, chronic stress has been identified as the most copious. We focus here on chronic stress within the domain of work. An important component of the stress process, of course, are the resources individuals bring to bear on threatening situations (Hobfoll, 1989; Pearlin, Menaghan, Lieberman, & Mullan, 1981). Thus, we complete this examination by considering the things people do to prevent, avoid, or control the emotional distress generated by stressful circumstances in their work settings (Light et al., 1995). We extend the recent findings that demonstrate the relationship between work stress, coping, and well-being in three ways. First, we assess multiple types of work stress, including perceptions of prejudice and discrimination. This component of the study speaks especially to the call by some scholars to ‘‘yembedymeasures of discrimination within broader assessments of stress exposurey’’ in order to develop a more coherent theory of the stress–illness relationship (see Kessler, Mickelson, & Williams, 1999, p. 225). Second, we examine whether coping resources are independently related to mental health, contributes in interaction with work stress, or both (Menaghan & Merves, 1984). This approach will lend itself to our discussion about a potentially fruitful linkage between traditional stress theory and conservation of resources (COR) theory (Hobfoll, 1989, 2002; Hobfoll & Shirom, 1993, 2000). This linkage may help explain why the black middle class, in particular, report higher levels of discrimination but have better mental health than their lower-class peers (Barefoot et al., 1991; Williams, Yu, Jackson, & Anderson, 1997). While we do not test COR theory in this study, we allow this component of the analysis to speak to the implications the results may have for COR theory. We discuss these implications later in the paper. Third, we utilize a unique set of data collected from a group of elite, upper-class African Americans. Because these are extraordinarily

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

141

successful and presumably highly resilient Blacks, given their positions of privilege and power, the question remains if they are insulated from negative work experiences.

BACKGROUND LITERATURE Work Stress and Mental Health There is a vast literature demonstrating the relationship between the nature of work and mental health (see Fenwick & Tausig, 1994; Menaghan, 1991; Messias et al., 1997; Pugliesi, 1995). This research focuses on the psychosocial aspects of work, rather than problems from the physical work environment. We pay particular attention to some common sources of work stress, such as role overload and role conflict, as well as a more recent addition to the social stress model, perceived discrimination. Role overload refers to having too many role demands and too little time to fulfill them (Rapoport & Rapoport, 1976; Repetti, 1989). For example, low-paying jobs often require long work hours, while many high-wage occupations demand extensive time commitments. Time pressures and long work hours are associated with greater psychological distress (Fenwick & Tausig, 1994; Loscocco & Spitze, 1990; Roxburgh, 2004; Voydanoff & Donnelly, 1989). Role conflict, on the other hand, can result from conflicting demands and expectations from different people. Not surprisingly, these types of problems have been shown to decrease mental health (Coverman, 1989; Schulz et al., 2000). There is growing evidence that perceived discrimination, as measured by lifetime and day-to-day exposure, is related to higher psychological distress (Finch, Kolody, & Vega, 2000; Gee, 2002; Jackson, Thoits, & Taylor, 1995; Kessler et al., 1999; Noh, Beiser, Kaspar, Hou, & Rummens, 1999; Pavalko, Mossakowski, & Hamilton, 2003; Williams et al., 1997). Discrimination is more likely to occur in the workplace than in school or public settings, when individuals are seeking housing, or in interactions with the police (see Forman, Williams, & Jackson, 1997; Ren, Amick, & Levine, 1997; Sigelman & Welch, 1991). For example, in a study of Black corporate executives, Collins (1993) argues that the Black middle-class are angry, alienated, and frustrated because they are underemployed (their job skills are not being used adequately) or have been placed in ‘‘racialized’’ jobs. Racialized jobs include those where the services are directed at, disproportionately used by, or concerned with, Blacks. This type of frustration is best exemplified in the

142

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

concept of goal-striving stress, where aspirations exceed actual achievement (Parker & Kleiner, 1966). Despite this fact, there is less empirical research on the psychological impact of discrimination in the workplace. An exception is the work of Schulz et al. (2000) who demonstrate that some adults who feel that they were denied a promotion or unfairly fired from a job during their lifetimes are less satisfied with life. Although this measure of discrimination includes a consideration of the domain of work, perceived discrimination in one’s current place of employment was not included in the study. This article fills this void. In addition, we consider the relative importance of perceived discrimination at work, within the context of other work problems. In general, African Americans with high educational, occupational, and income levels are more likely than their African American counterparts to report racial discrimination (Forman et al., 1997; Ren et al., 1997; Williams & Chung, 1997). Qualitative studies may help explain this counterintuitive pattern. Some studies indicate that Black professionals often face other forms of work stress as they interact with colleagues within their organizations. These problems include identity troubles that can stem from either over- or under-identifying with one’s racial/ethnic group and having to constantly prove one is worthy of respect (Cose, 1993). Kanter (1977) further argues that minorities who occupy token positions in their organizational settings experience performance pressures (added pressure to perform well) and boundary heightening (feeling socially isolated). Tokens are identified by ascribed characteristics (i.e., gender, race, ethnicity). Attached to these characteristics are sets of assumptions about the culture, competence, and behavior of the status occupant. Upwardly mobile African Americans often complain, in fact, of feelings of social isolation that accompany the pursuit of their goals (Benjamin, 1991; Oliver, 1995). These experiences are considered assessments of token stress because the person is viewed as a member of a group rather than a unique person. The concept of depersonalization is used in much of the occupational stress literature to refer to ‘‘ythinking of the self more in terms of a group member and less in terms of a unique individual’’ (Jackson & Smith, 1999). The concept of token stress adopted here is similar in definition. Token stress is associated with psychological problems (see Jackson et al., 1995). The concepts of perceived discrimination and token stress, however, address two different areas of the self-concept. Discrimination speaks to that portion of the self-referred to as the social exterior (Rosenberg, 1979). Here there is an assault on the self as a perceptual object: we are imagining

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

143

how we perceive others are viewing us. Responses by others can manifest itself through prejudice and discrimination. Token stress, on the other hand, challenges the social identity component of the self (Rosenberg, 1979). Although race is but one element of social identity, others may ask in a malicious manner, ‘‘who are you’’ or ‘‘who do you think you are?’’ In other words, perceived discrimination and token stress are two sides to the same racist coin. Perceived discrimination derives from perceptions of others’ reactions to us, while token stress is a personal response to the racist attitudes of others. The scientific literature on scrutiny as a form of work stress is much scantier than the other areas of work stress. Scrutiny can be defined as close, careful inspection. Nonetheless, the studies that have focused on this issue appear to concur that scrutiny may be as problematic as other forms of work stress (Yoder, 1991). The fear of being scrutinized by others is, in fact, a symptom of some forms of anxiety. There is some work on the impact of politics in the workplace on job anxiety, demonstrating that even a sense of understanding about work politics does little to decrease anxiety (e.g., see Ferris, Frink, Bhawuk, Zhou, & Gilmore, 1996). Although recent studies have established that many of the forms of work stress discussed above increase psychological distress, strategies for coping effectively with work problems have only been in a few quantitative studies among African American professionals (see Jackson & Stewart 2003).

Coping and Mental Health Coping resources are those efforts adopted to handle life problems. These efforts are often described as coping strategies which are adopted to manage specific situational demands or coping styles which are ‘‘ymore general coping behaviors that the individual employs when facing stressors across a variety of situations’’ (Thoits, 1995, p. 60). Various categories of coping strategies are identified in the stress literature (e.g., see Amirkhan, 1990; Decker & Borgen, 1993; Endler & Parker, 1990; Long, Kahn, & Schutz, 1992; Rohde, Lewinsohn, Tilson, & Seeley, 1990), although Lazarus and Folkman (1984) have provided the most widely utilized approach. These investigators distinguish broadly between problem-focused and emotionfocused coping. Problem-focused coping involves taking direct action, while emotion-focused coping generally refers to emotional reactions to demands. Pearlin and Schooler (1978) further subdivide emotion-focused coping into what might be called ‘‘perception-focused coping’’ (e.g., trying to see a

144

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

difficult situation in a different way) and ‘‘emotion management’’ (where the emphasis is on the regulation of feelings). Menaghan (1983) adopts a similar three-category scheme but utilizes a different set of labels (direct action, interpretive appraisal, and emotion management, respectively). Individuals typically engage in both problem- and emotion-focused coping in stressful situations (Decker & Borgen, 1993; Folkman & Lazarus, 1980; McCrae, 1984; Neighbors, Jackson, Bowman, & Gurin, 1983), however, active problem-solving is thought to be a more likely (and effective) response to controllable situations; emotion-focused coping attempts (including perception-focused strategies) are believed more frequent in situations perceived as uncontrollable. In regards to problems at work, active problem-solving is more often an effective buffer of psychological distress than attempts to reinterpret the situation or control feelings (see Mattlin, Wethington, & Kessler, 1990; Menaghan & Merves, 1984). Despite these findings, most studies in this area are restricted to White adults (see Menaghan, 1983 for a review; Long et al., 1992), making it difficult to determine how generalizable they are to ethnic minorities. Few studies consider the relationship between coping with discrimination and mental health. Benjamin (1991) provides a personalized portrait of the ways in which some members of the Black elite cope with racism. Using a convenience sample of well-known Black professionals, she found that the coping strategies described by these professionals ranged from accepting racism and discrimination within their organizations to rejecting racism and subsequently managing their emotions (including the use of humor). Seeking out social support through networking efforts seemed to be an effective strategy for many of these Black professionals. Wearing a mask (or hiding your feelings) can be the most damaging strategy a Black elite can use since these individuals often turn bitter about their circumstances (also see Frazier, 1957). Because Benjamin (1991) made no systematic attempt to describe the various coping strategies used by America’s Black elite, this study will provide this preliminary expose’. Lykes (1983) uses oral history data to consider whether perceived discrimination predicts the use of various coping strategies among a sample of older Black women. She argues that direct approaches (or instrumental coping) may not be the best strategy when faced with discrimination. The context in which the discrimination is experienced (e.g., racial composition of the workplace) may be more or less conducive to the use of certain strategies. On one hand, the unstructured interview format makes it difficult to assess the general psychological impact of racism or discrimination and coping efforts in Lykes’ (1983) study (also see Feagin & Sikes, 1994). On the

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

145

other hand, Noh et al. (1999) find that passive acceptance and avoidance strategies actually decrease the impact of discrimination on depression in their study of Southeast Asian refugees from Canada. The use of a more direct approach (referred to as confrontation) was not associated with depression in the study, adding some support to Lykes’ (1983) findings (also see Clark & Anderson, 2001). The studies by Lykes (1983) and Noh (1999) suggest that problems generated from negative racial attitudes may be more sensitive to the use of emotion-focused coping strategies than are more traditional work problems. We consider the relative importance of coping efforts during high work stress. Many African Americans are optimistic about the future of race relations in this country despite the fact that they believe that Whites are prejudiced (Sigelman & Welch, 1991). These African Americans may be more likely to rely upon temporary solutions to handling work-related problems, feeling that if they hold out long enough they may see some type of change in their workplaces. Instead of directly addressing a co-worker who constantly questions their competence, for example, the minority worker may attempt to address this situation in a more covert way, such as keeping busy (Benjamin, 1991). Or, if they feel they cannot alter the conditions of their work settings, minority group members may seek solace through positive thinking. There is some evidence that optimistic comparisons reduce occupational distress (Menaghan & Merves, 1984). We build upon the coping literature by adopting the two-category scheme used in previous studies (problem- and emotion-focused coping strategies). Although there is no standard method of categorizing coping responses (McCrae, 1984), we adopt the labels of confrontation to refer to problemfocused coping efforts (Noh et al., 1999). These strategies are direct attempts to change a situation personally or talk to others to try to find a solution. Given the more consistent findings of the benefits of perceived social support (see Thoits, 1995), we expect confrontation to be the most efficacious coping response. Direct action may improve mental health in the short run; however, there is some evidence that work stress actually increases in the long term when adults utilize this approach (Menaghan & Merves, 1984). The emotion-focused strategies in this study fall within previously defined categories labeled forbearance (e.g., hiding feelings), optimistic comparisons (e.g., seeing others as worse off), distraction (e.g., keeping busy), and avoidance (leaving the situation). Forbearance refers to attempts to manage emotional responses (Noh et al., 1999). While these efforts seem helpful among some ethnic minorities, Benjamin’s (1991) work on the Black elite suggests that this strategy will be associated with poor mental health among

146

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

this sample of adults. Optimistic comparisons occur when individuals use ‘‘comparative frames of reference – with others and with one’s own past and future – in such a way that one’s own situation is judged in a positive light’’ (Menaghan, 1983, p. 164). We believe this coping strategy will be beneficial, whereas distraction and avoidance will not be effective ways of handling work stress (Mattlin et al., 1990; Menaghan, 1983; Menaghan & Merves, 1984; Pearlin & Schooler, 1978; Rohde et al., 1990). COR theory offers a useful framework to consolidate many of the nonparsimonious findings in much of the coping literature. According to COR theory, actors are not passive recipients of stressful situations but are motivated to retain valued resources (Hobfoll, 1989, 2002; Hobfoll & Shirom, 1993, 2000). This perspective views the stress – coping relationship as a continuous negotiation between the actor and his/her work environment. For example, individuals must decide what resources (e.g., self-respect) they can sacrifice in order to retain other more valued resources (e.g., income). In doing so, they determine the type and level of resources needed to achieve the ultimate or final outcome (e.g., sound mental health). COR theory presents an ideal type of stress-coping model that should be incorporated in future research on Black professionals. Here, we consider this approach as the findings emerge in the context of a snapshot of the way in which members of the Black elite engage work stress. Another important principle in COR theory is the contention that individuals with more resources are better situated to gain future resources than those lacking in resources at some initial period. This particular principle has its corollary in the research on aging and is aptly put by Tausig, Michello, and Subedi (1999): yif we all go through similar status transitions, those who go through these with better resources will have better psychological outcomes and, over time, the difference in outcomes will increase (cumulative advantage). Alternatively, those with lower resources are more likely to have poorer psychological outcomes and, having had poorer outcomes, they will have even worse outcomes from dealing with subsequent stressors (cumulative disadvantage) (p. 55).

This position is consistent with the roles-as-resources perspective as well (Callero, 1994; Hobfoll, 1989; Jackson, 1997, 2004; Thoits, 1994). Regardless of the view, these perspectives make the cogent point that individuals often actively and purposefully negotiate stressful environments. Those with initial resources should be able to navigate stressful environments more successfully than those lacking resources. Thus, while the Black middle class may experience more discrimination than their lower-class peers, they have the resources to re-establish the equilibrium lost in times of high work stress.

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

147

The question we address here is simply whether there are certain forms of work stress that seem more amenable to these efforts than others. The design of the study allows for a discussion of the context in which coping efforts appear beneficial (or problematic); a strategy that can possibly reduce the complexity in ‘‘yan already complex literature’’ (Thoits, 1995). Furthermore, by considering a variety of work stressors, including perceived discrimination, this research addresses the call for more attention to the ways in which ethnic minorities can increase resistance to life problems (Kessler et al., 1999; Williams, Takeuchi, & Adair, 1992). In summary, the following questions are addressed in this study: (1) Do Black elites experience work stress, and if so, what types of work stress are most prevalent?; (2) How do Black elites cope with work stress?; (3) Does perceived discrimination predict mental health among America’s Black elite?; (4) Does coping have an independent effect on mental health?; and (5) Are there certain coping resources that buffer (or exacerbate) the psychological impact of work stress?

DATA Data used in this study are from the Black Leadership Study, a research project directed by Taylor (1992) at Princeton between 1983 and 1988 and funded by a grant from the Cornerhouse Fund, New York, N.Y. The primary goals of the Black Elite Survey were to collect systematic background information on Black elites, to examine the structure of the network links among these leaders, and to describe variations in the political and policy attitudes of the group. Structured personal interviews also elicited information on occupational stress, coping responses, and symptoms of psychological distress. Black interviewers interviewed the majority of respondents. Despite the time period in which this data was collected, it is the best available for the purposes of this study. Benjamin’s (1991) data was also collected during this time period (1985–1988; N ¼ 100). The most widely cited national data on Black Americans (the National Survey of Black Americans, NSBA) was collected in 1979–1980. Although there is a followup to this data set, the items on work problems do not address achievementrelated stress. In fact, coping strategies and mental health status were only assessed among adults who mentioned they were dealing with a ‘‘personal problem’’ (see Neighbors et al., 1983). To obtain a sampling frame of America’s national Black leaders, several population lists were compiled. First, institutional sector lists were developed

148

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

(see Taylor, 1992 for a detailed annotation of sources for each institutional sector). Sectors included major executives in both predominantly White and Black businesses, then-current Black mayors of major cities (and some former mayors), then-current Black members of the US Congress, Black federal judges, high-ranking military officers, heads of predominantly Black voluntary and civil rights organizations, Black heads of major philanthropic foundations, major media personalities (including columnists, correspondents, editors of major magazines, editors of Black newspapers in large cities, entertainers, and athletes), high-ranking labor union officers, major civil service officials, and high-ranking Democratic, Republican, and Independent party officers. Other listings included presidents of predominantly Black colleges and universities, nationally prominent ministers, scholars and educators, writers and literary figures (intellectuals), and wealthy Blacks. Second, Blacks in Who’s Who in America (42nd ed., 1982–1983, published by Marquis of Chicago) were enumerated. Because Who’s Who in America (WWA) does not indicate individuals’ race or ethnicity, Who’s Who Among Black Americans (WWBA) (3rd ed., 1980–1981, Who’s Who Among Black Americans Publishing Co., Northbrook, IL) was used as a cross-check for race. WWBA is by far the most lengthy source list of prominent Blacks in the US (17,000 names were included in the 1980–1981 edition). There were 960 names common to both sources. Those names not already on the WWA/WWBA list were added to it. A list of 260 potential respondents resulted from these sampling procedures. See appendix for more details on the compilation of the sector lists. The response rate in the study was 70.5% (N ¼ 167), excluding those who, between the time of sampling and contact for interview, had died, moved from the US, or were unreachable for other reasons (N ¼ 23). This response rate is comparable to rates obtained in other major studies of elites, which range from 40% to 80%, with 60–70% being modal (Benjamin, 1991; Taylor, 1992). This study includes 135 respondents because approximately 30 respondents have missing data on the work stress and psychological symptom scales. While the final sample size is small, it is consistent with other studies of the Black elite (see Benjamin, 1991). Because a number of respondents were extremely pressed for time, interviewers were instructed in such cases to skip specific blocks of interview questions, including psychological distress, work stress, and coping items. The majority of the respondents are middle-aged, male, married, highly educated (95% are college graduates, 63% have advanced degrees), report median family earnings of $82,000 per year, and are in a wide range of prestigious occupations. Respondents for whom the work stress, distress,

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

149

and coping questions were skipped are quite similar demographically to other respondents in the study. Most are older males (the average age is 55), highly educated (66% report an advanced degree), married (85%), and earn high incomes. In addition, many of these respondents work in Congress (n ¼ 13; 43%) suggesting that these politicians were probably the most pressed for time. While this data set is quite unique, it does have certain limitations. In particular, the cross-sectional design employed here does not allow us to discount the possibility that previous coping efforts (or psychological states) are related to the level of work problems reported, especially since members of the Black elite are not well represented in any previous longitudinal study (Menaghan & Merves, 1984). It is also possible that there is a reciprocal relationship between coping responses and mental health. Given the design of this study, the goal is to provide a preliminary examination of the relationship between work stress, coping resources, and mental health among the Black professional class. Future work is required to explore the ways in which initial coping strategies may be related to later occupational and psychological problems in elite samples. We assume that these highly influential respondents are able to report fairly accurately on the stressors they encounter in their professional lives, but the possibility of reverse causality cannot be dismissed.

MEASURES AND METHODS Mental Health. The dependent variables measuring mental health include abbreviated symptom scales from the Johns Hopkins Symptom Checklist, assessing depression, anxiety, and somaticism. For brevity, items were selected if they had high-factor loadings on these scales (Derogatis, Lipman, Covi, & Rickles, 1971) and also matched symptom items included in the National Survey of Black Americans (Neighbors et al., 1983). Exploratory factor analyses showed that these items formed three factors in this sample. Depression was indicated by the sum of five items: ‘‘In the past week, how often did you feel down or depressed, feel hopeless about the future, feel that you just couldn’t get going, feel lonely, lack enthusiasm for doing anything?’’ Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was 0.81. Anxiety consisted of three items: ‘‘In the past week, how often did you feel tense or keyed up, feel nervous, have your heart pound or race when you were not physically active?’’ Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was 0.77. Somaticism consisted of five items: ‘‘In the past week, how often did you have an upset stomach, have

150

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

headaches or head pains, feel low in energy or slowed down, have trouble getting your breath, have tightness or tension in your neck, back, or other muscles?’’ Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was 0.76. Responses for these items ranged from 1 ¼ never to 5 ¼ very often. Psychological distress is the combined items from each scale (alpha ¼ 0.88). Work Stress. Respondents were asked if their work involved any of 16 pressures (0 ¼ no, 1 ¼ yes). Those who indicated experiencing a particular work pressure was then asked how much this pressure bothered them (1 ¼ not at all, 2 ¼ somewhat, 3 ¼ very much). Given the smaller number of respondents who addressed the second component of this question, we rely on information from the dichotomous indicators for each work stress item. Exploratory factor analysis produced five types of work stress. They included perceived discrimination (alpha ¼ 0.76): experiencing discrimination or prejudice, nonacceptance by Whites, nonacceptance by Blacks, value conflicts (mean ¼ 1.68, s.d. ¼ 1.46); token stress (alpha ¼ 0.60): loss of Black identity, multiple demands of being Black, feeling that you have to demonstrate more competence than others, a sense of isolation (mean ¼ 1.74, s.d. ¼ 1.22); role overload (alpha ¼ 0.61): too many demands on your time, juggling your private life and your work life, too many responsibilities (mean ¼ 1.88, s.d. ¼ 1.03); role conflict (alpha ¼ 0.57): hostility from others, political in-fighting, conflicting demands from various groups you work with (mean ¼ 1.68, s.d. ¼ 1.08); and scrutiny (alpha ¼ 0.48): scrutiny by the public, scrutiny by your colleagues (mean ¼ 1.44, s.d. ¼ 0.72). These work stress items were examined as individual scales in the analysis and combined to form an index that was considered in some of the empirical models (Cronbach’s alpha ¼ 0.81). Coping Resources. Respondents were asked to indicate what coping style(s) they might use ‘‘to make a difficult, stressful work period easier to bear.’’ As such, the strategies described are not mutually exclusive. Many respondents selected multiple ways in which they cope with work stress. Because there is some overlap in the items, the impact of each style on the outcome measures is explored simultaneously in our analytical models. Also note that these are answers to a hypothetical situation and do not tap what respondents actually do in response to a specific work stressor. In essence, they tap respondents’ coping tendencies or coping preferences, rather than actual coping efforts. Possible responses were 0 ¼ no and 1 ¼ yes. The coping strategies were combined into the following categories. Problem-focused coping include a response to: (1) try to face the problem squarely and do something about it and (2) seek out someone who will listen. Emotion-focused strategies include: (3) hide feelings, (4) try to see the

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

151

problem from another perspective, (5) try to look on the bright side of things, (6) remind yourself that others are worse off, (7) pray or have someone pray for you, (8) keep busy doing other things like reading books, going places, watching television, (9) relax, not let it bother you, just take things as they come, (10) try to put the problems of that time out of your mind, (11) exercise, (12) leave the situation for a while, (13) have a drink, and (14) take pills or medicine. The first two responses are forms of confrontation. Forbearance is represented by the third strategy. Strategies 4–7 are combined to form an index of optimistic comparisons; 8–11 represent attempts at distraction; while 12–14 are avoidance strategies. To address flexibility in coping efforts, we combined the emotion-focused strategies (items 4–14) into a single index (alpha ¼ 0.54) to explore the independent effects of these coping efforts on mental health (see Holahan & Moos, 1991). Respondents were also asked within this series of questions regarding coping, to select a coping strategy that worked best in handling work pressures. Using these responses, we created a variable comparing those respondents who selected confrontation (facing the problem squarely and doing something about it or seeking out someone who will listen coded ‘‘1’’) to all others (coded ‘‘0’’). Forty-three percent of elites chose confrontation as the best way of handling work pressures. These strategies and the categories under which they fall reflect those described in the coping literature (e.g., see Menaghan & Merves, 1984). While these strategies do not exhaust the possible ways in which people deal with work problems, they represent a wide range of coping choices (see Rohde et al., 1990). Nine variables are included as controls: age (measured in years), gender (0 ¼ male, 1 ¼ female), marital status (0 ¼ unmarried, 1 ¼ married), education (measured in years), income (measured in thousands of dollars), occupation (four dummy variables representing businesspersons, academics, entertainers, and ‘‘other’’ leaders, with politicians as the omitted comparison category), number of children, gender representation in the workplace (percent opposite gender), and race proportional representation in the workplace (percent Black). These variables are standard in models predicting mental health and have been shown to affect psychological well-being among African Americans (Jackson, 1997, 2004).

Analytic Strategy To examine the influence of work stress and coping strategies on mental health, we adopt OLS regression techniques, entering the independent

152

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

variables into a series of equations. First, we examine the impact of each type of work stressor on the mental health outcomes to determine if there is an independent effect of each type of problem, holding constant the background variables. Second, we estimate a series of models that include all of the work stress items. This analysis speaks to the relative importance of different types of work stress, especially perceived discrimination. Third, building on this more complete model, we then include coping strategies in the equations predicting mental health. This analysis serves two functions: to examine the role of coping strategies as moderators of the work stress – mental health relationship; and to describe the independent mental health effects of coping strategies (Baron & Kenny, 1986). The fourth set of analysis was designed to examine whether coping strategies have an effect at high levels of work stress. A series of regression equations were estimated which included individual multiplicative terms representing the possible problem-by-coping strategy (e.g., perceived discrimination*confrontation) effect. Individual interaction terms were added to the equation to reduce the problem of multicollinearity. A hierarchical F-test was used to determine if there was a significant increment in the explained variance from the linear additive model (see Menaghan & Merves, 1984 for a similar approach). There were three significant changes to the additive models. In other words, some coping efforts were especially useful (or problematic) in times of high work stress. These results are summarized in the body of the paper (along with the unstandardized regression coefficients and significance levels) rather than presented in table form. The significance level for all analyses is set at p ¼ 0.10 to accommodate the small sample (see Lennon, 1994; Moen, Robison, & Dempster-McClain, 1995; and Thoits, 1983 for a similar approach).

RESULTS Descriptives Question #1. Do Black Elites Experience Work Stress? As demonstrated in Table 1, the answer to this question is an unequivocal, yes. In terms of perceived discrimination, approximately 42.4% of adults report this work problem. A similar percentage of adults experience token stress in the workplace (44.1%). On the other hand, role overload and role conflict are more prevalent problems among these adults. Approximately, 62.8% of adults report role overload, 56.4% report role conflict, and 72.5%

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

Table 1.

153

Distribution of Specific Types of Work Stress among Sample of America’s Black Elitea.

Work Pressures

How much are you Bothered by this Pressure?b Not at all

Somewhat

Very much

%

n

%

%

%

Perceived discrimination (alpha ¼ 0:76) Discrimination or prejudice Nonacceptance by Whites Nonacceptance by Blacks Value conflicts

56.2 35.8 27.2 50.4

77 49 37 69

14.1 40.4 36.1 18.5

64.8 53.2 47.2 69.2

21.1 6.4 16.7 12.3

Average %

42.4

27.3

58.6

14.1

Token stress (alpha ¼ 0:60) Loss of Black identity Multiple demands of being Black Feeling that you have to demonstrate more competence than others A sense of isolation Average % Role overload (alpha ¼ 0:61) Too many demands on your time Juggling your private life and your work life Too many responsibilities

13.2 58.5 61.6

18 79 85

16.7 21.3 25.3

55.6 64.0 46.8

27.8 14.7 27.8

43.1

59

13.6

72.9

13.6

19.2

59.8

21.0

10.3 10.8

50.5 57.0

39.2 32.3

44.1

74.6 72.5

103 100

41.3

57

Average %

62.8

Role conflict (alpha ¼ 0:57) Hostility from others Political in-fighting Conflicting demands from various groups you work with

45.2 61.3 62.8

Average %

56.4

Scrutiny (alpha ¼ 0:48) Scrutiny by the public Scrutiny by your colleagues

70.3 74.6

Average % Total work stress (alpha ¼ 0:81)

a

72.5

61 84 86

97 103

21.6

51.0

27.5

14.2

52.8

33.0

29.5 19.0 13.3

55.7 51.9 67.5

14.8 29.1 19.3

20.6

58.4

21.1

31.9 28.9

38.5 49.5

29.7 21.6

30.4

44.0

25.7

X ¼ 8.4 s.d. ¼ 3.84 n ¼ 132

Columns do not add up to 100% because some respondents listed more than one type of work pressure. b These percentages are based on respondents who reported experiencing a particular work pressure.

154

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

report scrutiny by the public and/or colleagues. Of those who report work stress, most are somewhat bothered by these issues. In fact, perceived discrimination is one of the areas by which Black elites are bothered least (27.3% say not at all), whereas role overload is an area that bothers Black elites the most (33% say these problems bother them very much). Question #2. How do Black Elites Cope with Work Stress? Confrontation (or problem-focused coping) is a prevalent strategy among Black elites. All of the respondents say that they face problems squarely and do something about them and most adults seek out support from others (see Table 2). In terms of emotion-focused strategies, forbearance is adopted by approximately half of the sample (53.3%), a figure similar to the use of this strategy in other studies of ethnic minorities (see Noh et al., 1999). Another prevalent strategy is to use some form of optimistic thinking when dealing with work stress. In particular, Black elites say they try to see the problem from another perspective and/or look on the bright side of things. Many professionals say they pray or seek out someone who will pray for them, when they are faced with work problems (46%). Religious coping is often assumed to be a common strategy among African Americans, given their high church attendance and level of commitment to their religious identity (e.g., see Ellison, 1993). While this figure provides some confirmation for this supposition (also see Broman, 1996; Neighbors et al., 1983), the majority of elites do not believe this strategy is particularly useful (55.5%). It is difficult to compare this figure with those reported in previous studies of White adults because of differences in the wording of the question and the way in which religious coping is often assessed. For example, one study found that only 6% of White, married couples sought spiritual comfort to cope with a stressful event (Stone & Neale, 1984). Another study reported 73% of White, married couples say they relied on their religious beliefs to cope with a stressful event either a lot, some, or a little (Mattlin et al., 1990). In these studies, religious coping is typically measured in terms of frequency of prayer or church attendance rather than within a scheme of coping options. Distraction and avoidance strategies are also adopted by many Black elites, especially staying busy or leaving a situation for a while. Some adults report having a drink during a stressful work period (30.1%) but very few professionals take pills or medicine to cope with work stress (5.2%). This particular pattern of substance use is probably a function of the gender composition of this sample (77% male). Men are more likely to use alcohol than they are to take pills when trying to cope with stressful situations

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

Table 2.

155

Distribution of Specific Types of Coping Strategies among Sample of America’s Black Elite. Coping Strategiesa

How Much Does This Strategy Help?b Not at all

A little

Somewhat

A great deal

%

n

%

%

%

%

100.0

135

0.8

1.5

16.0

81.7

77.8

105

0.0

13.6

45.6

40.8

53.3

72

11.6

8.7

46.4

33.3

93.3

125

0.0

3.3

34.7

62.0

91.8 60.7 45.9

123 82 62

0.0 3.8 55.5

9.2 17.7 5.1

44.2 53.2 14.6

46.7 25.3 24.1

Distraction Keep busy doing other things Relax, not let it bother me Try to put it out of my mind Exercise

85.2 74.1 52.6 79.1

115 100 71 106

1.8 0.0 2.9 1.0

8.8 4.3 5.9 2.9

49.6 49.5 58.8 47.1

39.8 46.2 32.4 49.0

Avoidance Leave the situation for a while Have a drink Take pills

70.9 30.1 5.2

95 41 7

1.1 10.3 14.3

16.3 46.2 42.9

58.7 35.9 14.3

23.9 7.7 28.6

Problem-focused coping Confrontation Face the problem squarely and do something about it Seek out someone who will listen Emotion-focused Coping Forbearance Hide feelings Optimistic comparisons Try to see the problem from another perspective Try to look on the bright side of things Remind myself that others are worse off Pray or have someone pray for me

a

Columns do not add up to 100% because some respondents listed more than one type of coping strategy. b These percentages are based on respondents who reported experiencing a particular coping strategy.

(Menaghan, 1983). The confrontation strategy of facing the problem could not be included in the multivariate analysis because there is no variation. Despite the use of alcohol, very few elites believe it is a useful strategy (only 7.7% say it helps a great deal). Question #3. Does Perceived Discrimination Predict Mental Health? Two steps were utilized to address this question. First, the mental health measures were regressed on each type of work stress in separate equations. Second, the work stressors were combined in each model predicting mental

156

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

health. Table 3 presents the results from the 20 separate models (five work stressors
four mental health outcomes). Table 4 presents results from the combined models, where work stressors were included in the same regression equation, producing a total of four models. As shown in Table 3, perceived discrimination is associated with each indicator of mental health. Elites who report that discrimination is a problem on their jobs are more depressed, anxious, and somatic. Not surprisingly, then, perceived discrimination predicts psychological distress. Similarly, Black elites who experience token stress report more symptoms of depression, anxiety, somaticism, and psychological distress. Role overload is also associated with each of the mental health indicators. Role conTable 3. OLS Regression of Mental Health Outcomes on Individual Indicators of Work Stress. Work Stress

Mental Health Depression B 0.490

Perceived discrimination Intercept 11.891 R2 (Adjusted) 0.152

(se)

Anxiety B

(0.235) 0.350

(se) (0.172)

6.857 0.039 (0.270) 0.566 6.180 0.096

Somaticism B 0.429 12.387 0.064

+

(se)

B

(se)

(0.223)

1.269

(0.532)

31.135 0.113

Token stress Intercept R2 (Adjusted)

0.754 10.938 0.206

(0.246)

2.122 28.557 0.215

(0.600)

Role overload Intercept R2 (Adjusted)

1.181 (0.334) 1.251 (0.222) 1.116 (0.317) 11.599 6.142 11.761 0.228 0.283 0.154

3.548 29.502 0.276

(0.716)

Role conflict Intercept R2 (Adjusted)

0.234 12.103 0.109

(0.342) 0.406+ 6.548 0.022

(0.246)

0.316 12.359 0.031

(0.323)

0.956 31.009 0.065

(0.776)

Scrutiny Intercept R2 (Adjusted)

0.589 12.359 0.121

(0.487) 0.439 7.059 0.010

(0.355)

0.426 12.559 0.030

(0.463)

1.454 31.976 0.069

(1.109)

(0.199)

0.802 11.439 0.203

Psychological Distress

Note: N ¼ 132; B ¼ unstandardized regression coefficient with standard error in parentheses. Each equation controlled for the following background variables: age, gender, marital status, education, income, occupation, number of children, and proportional representation by race and gender. + po0.10.  po0.05.  po0.01.  po0.001.

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

157

flict, on the other hand, is only associated with anxiety. Surprisingly, scrutiny is not related to any of the indicators of mental health. As demonstrated in Table 4, the combined scale assessing work stress is also associated with poor mental health. The more work stress experienced, the higher the levels of depression, anxiety, somaticism, and subsequently, psychological distress. However, when we disaggregate the work stress index and consider the individual effects of work stress, holding constant the other areas of work problems, several patterns emerge. Perceived discrimination no longer has a significant effect on any of the mental health measures when other work stressors are taken into consideration. In fact, token stress and role overload surface as the most important determinants of mental health among America’s Black elite. In terms of the covariates, elites who are married and those who work in college settings report fewer symptoms of depression than the unmarried and politicians, respectively. In terms of anxiety, elites who are married and those with high levels of education are less anxious than their counterparts. Table 4.

OLS Regression of Mental Health Outcomes on all Indicators of Work Stress.

Work Stress

Mental Health Depression B

Total work stress Intercept R2 (Adjusted)

0.280 (0.089) 11.124 0.229

Five subscales Perceived discrimination 0.263 Token stress 0.609 Role overload 1.112 Role conflict 0.561 Scrutiny 0.006 Intercept R2 (Adjusted)

(se)

10.853 0.281

Anxiety B

Somaticism (se)

B

B

(se)

0.830 28.424 0.265

(0.195)

(0.252) 0.638 (0.267) 1.619 (0.324) 3.243 (0.350) 1.038 (0.454) 0.008

(0.576) (0.611) (0.739) (0.800) (1.037)

(se)

0.256 (0.064) 0.294 (0.081) 5.898 11.402 0.178 0.225

(0.274) 0.106 (0.291) 0.385 (0.352) 1.173 (0.381) 0.146 (0.494) 0.008 5.616 0.300

(0.187) 0.269 (0.193) 0.625 (0.240) 0.958 (0.260) 0.331 (0.337) 0.007 11.206 0.265

Psychological Distress

27.675 0.364

Note: N ¼ 132; B ¼ unstandardized regression coefficient with standard error in parentheses. Each equation controlled for the following background variables: age, gender, marital status, education, income, occupation, number of children, and proportional representation by race and gender.  po0.05.  po0.01.  po0.001.

158

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

Question #4. Does Coping Predict Mental Health? Table 5 shows the independent (or main) effects of coping strategies on mental health, holding constant the background variables and work stressors. As shown here, confrontation (seeking support) is directly associated with decreased anxiety while forbearance (hiding feelings) is related to increased depression, anxiety, and psychological distress. Avoidance strategies are related to increased anxiety and somatic symptoms. These patterns are consistent with the broader literature and earlier expectations (e.g., see Parkes, 1990). Optimistic comparisons and distraction do not have an independent effect on mental health. Nonetheless, coping efforts seem to moderate the impact of token stress and role overload on mental health, as evidenced by the decrease in the coefficient for each of these work stressors compared to their effects in the original model (see Table 3). We also considered flexibility in coping efforts by estimating the mental health equations and including a measure of the sum total of emotionfocused coping strategies utilized during a stressful work period (excluding forbearance). Even in combination, emotion-focused coping strategies are not related to mental health (data not shown). Within the context of the coping strategy section of the survey, respondents were also asked to select the best coping strategy from the list of options. Even though confrontational styles were the most prevalent selection, in an exploratory analysis we found that these coping efforts (facing the problem or talking to others) are not associated with positive mental health (data not shown). There was very little evidence of a mediating model in this sample. While some forms of work stress predict the use of some coping strategies, individual coping strategies were not consistently related to mental health. For example, elites who report perceived discrimination are more likely to say they try to keep busy and they exercise during a stressful work period, but these individual strategies are not related to psychological distress. Question #5. Does Coping Buffer (or Exacerbate) the Psychological Impact of Work Stressors? Perhaps there are certain strategies used by Black professionals that reduce (or exaggerate) the psychological impact of repeated exposure to work stress. Again, given the sheer number of models estimated, we present a summary of the results rather than several tables. After examining a series of regression models that included the main effects of each area of work stress and coping efforts, along with an interaction term, two patterns emerged. First, Black elites who perceive discrimination on their jobs and who utilize forbearance (or hide their feelings) report higher levels of depression

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

Table 5.

159

OLS Regression of Mental Health Outcomes on Work Stress and Coping Strategies.

Work Stress

Perceived discrimination Token stress Role overload Role conflict Scrutiny

Mental Health Depression

Anxiety

Somaticism

Psychological Distress

B

B

B

B

0.312 (0.299) 0.511 (0.319) 0.997 (0.388) 0.628 (0.420) 0.262 (0.537)

0.005 (0.184) 0.311 (0.196) 1.005 (0.239) 0.000 (0.259) 0.000 (0.331)

0.151 (0.265) 0.513+ (0.282) 0.807 (0.344) 0.195 (0.372) 0.001 (0.476)

0.517 (0.596) 1.335 (0.636) 2.809 (0.775) 0.827 (0.838) 0.273 (1.072)

0.450 (1.095) 1.140+ (0.693) 0.148 (0.420) 0.323 (0.398) 0.002 (0.511)

1.636 (0.674) 0.868 (0.427) 0.000 (0.259) 0.174 (0.245) 0.603+ (0.315)

1.287 (0.969) 0.749 (0.614) 0.006 (0.372) 0.183 (0.352) 0.921 (0.452)

3.373 (2.184) 2.756 (1.384) 0.218 (0.838) 0.003 (0.793) 1.501 (1.019)

10.947 0.238

6.010 0.382

10.869 0.272

27.826 0.383

Coping strategies Confrontation/Support Forbearance/Hide Optimistic comparisons Distraction Avoidance Intercept R2 (Adjusted)

Note: N ¼ 132; B ¼ unstandardized regression coefficient with standard error in parentheses. Each equation controlled for the following variables: age, gender, marital status, education, income, number of children, and race and gender proportional representation. + po0.10.  po0.05.  po0.001.

(B ¼ 1.456, po0.001), anxiety (B ¼ 0.603, po0.10), and subsequently psychological distress (B ¼ 2.478, po0.05), than their peers who report fewer problems in this area of work life. There was no main effect of either perceived discrimination or forbearance in these models, indicating that this

160

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

strategy is most problematic when used by adults who rank at the high end of this work stress scale. Second, optimistic comparisons appear useful in the context of token stress and role overload. Elites who have problems with tokenism but who make positive social comparisons report less depression (B ¼ 0.912, po0.05). In general, optimistic thinking in the face of token stress also reduces psychological distress (B ¼ 1.440, po0.10). Optimistic comparisons also help in times of role overload. Elites who experience role overload but who use optimistic comparisons are less depressed (B ¼ 0.793, po0.05). It was surprising to find so few significant effects of confrontation (seeking support) on mental health. In considering the question regarding the best coping strategy utilized during times of high work pressure, we computed multiplicative terms between this response (coded 1 if confrontation strategies are used, and 0 if other strategies are selected as the best) and each type of work stress. In these models, we found that elites who report many problems in the area of token stress and utilize confrontation (say they face their problems squarely and do something about them or seek out support from others) are actually more depressed (B ¼ 1.308, po0.05) than their peers. Thus, confrontation among this group of elite workers actually seems to be problematic (see Menaghan & Merves, 1984 for similar results).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS A large literature has shown that work experiences are related to mental health. This study contributes to this body of work by further demonstrating that even among those adults who have achieved high economic status, the workplace can still generate stressful life experiences. This study further illustrates the importance of taking into consideration other types of work stress, especially when purporting a relationship between some forms of perceived discrimination and well-being. Many Black elite report discrimination as a problem and say that they experience some form of tokenism in the workplace. These particular problems, however, are not as pressing or psychologically damaging as everyday concerns of work overload (Kessler et al., 1999). There is some indication that members of the Black elite utilize coping efforts that reduce the perception of work problems. All of the adults in this study say they face problems squarely and do something about them. This finding is consistent with research on predominantly White samples, where

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

161

members of higher socioeconomic status (SES) categories are more likely to attempt direct action when faced with work problems than members of the lower class (Menaghan & Merves, 1984). However, this particular strategy raises concerns for elites who are trying to deal with tokenism in the workplace. Making optimistic comparisons appear to be a much better approach when faced with token stress (see Menaghan & Merves, 1984 for similar findings for occupational problems, in general). Hiding one’s feelings is an anxiety-producing strategy, especially among adults dealing with perceptions of discrimination. Much of the work on the Black middle-class, in fact, speaks of the collective psychological damage done by racism (Collins, 1993, 1997; Cose, 1993; Frazier, 1957). Graham (1995) describes the Black professional class as ‘‘yabandoned and ostracized by other Blacks and resented or rejected by Whites’’ (p. xiv). Collins (1993, 1997) argues that the Black middle-class are an angry and alienated group that confronts the problem of whether to attempt to go all the way into the mainstream or go back to their cultural roots. Pretending that these issues do not exist seems to be part of the coping repertoire developed by America’s Black elite. As one of Benjamin’s interviewees noted: Race is a factor in America. Sometimes it’s obvious, sometimes noty. You have to confront it – sometimes head on – and sometimes you circumvent it.y (1991, p. 203)

The results from this study suggest that confronting racism (as measured by perceived discrimination and token stress) head-on does not work and circumventing it makes things worse. What then is the strategy for dealing with perceived discrimination? Having a strong ethnic identity seems to intensify the relationship between perceived discrimination and depression (Noh et al., 1999). Thus, perhaps elites who identify more with those who occupy the same social class position, rather than with individuals who belong to the same racial/ethnic group, are better insulated from discriminatory experiences (Branscombe, Schmitt, & Harvey, 1999). Alternatively, Graham (1995) provides an extensive ethnography of the support system created by the Black upper-class. These tight knit circles tend to include family members and friends who belong to African American elite social clubs (e.g., Jack and Jill). A strong reliance on the family for social support often proves useful among ethnic minorities who are confronted by discrimination in the workplace (Bailey, Wolfe, & Wolfe, 1996; Ellison, 1990; Lykes, 1983). Other psychosocial resources may also play a role in this process. For example, adults with a high sense of mastery and self-esteem may be better positioned to handle these work problems. A key argument in COR theory,

162

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

in fact, is that the presence of social resources facilitates the use of other resources, such as coping strategies (Hobfoll, 1989). It is here, then, that we envision a future research agenda that includes consideration of the dynamic process between stressful work experiences and the initiation of coping efforts that, in turn, determine the extent to which stress results in diminished mental health. The results from this study in conjunction with Hobfoll’s (1986, 1989, 2002) extensive line of research suggests strong promise for a conceptual model that includes a variety of measures of resources. For example, studies of professionals should take into consideration such resources as self-respect (Steele, Spencer, & Lynch, 1993). A sense of self-respect may be especially pertinent among tokens who feel that the legitimacy of their social status is always in question by their co-workers (Cose, 1993). There is growing evidence, in fact, that highly successful minorities suffer from stereotype threat (Kray, Thompson, & Galinsky, 2001; Steele, 1997) where they worry extensively that their poor performance will be attributed to a negative stereotype about them. COR theory also emphasizes the importance of assessing the value placed upon these diverse resources (Hobfoll, 1989) as well as the way in which efforts are exchanged on behalf of other resources when the initial resource proves ineffective (Oken, 1987). This particular study of the Black elite will allow for further consideration of the effectiveness of particular strategies, but the most fruitful avenue for future research should draw attention to the dynamic interplay between stressors and resources (Hobfoll, 1989). Role overload seems to be the intractable problem that is not conducive to individual efforts. It is here then that we find the most similarity in work experiences across social class categories. While ethnic minorities may experience different forms of racism (e.g., perceived discrimination, acculturation stress, tokenism), all workers seem to be vulnerable to work role overload. In general, when coping efforts are expended, workers experience job burnout (Wright & Hobfoll, 2004). This study further demonstrated the utility of social support and the problematic nature of avoiding the situation. These findings are consistent with research on the general population (see Thoits, 1995; Menaghan & Merves, 1984). Nonetheless, future work should focus on reciprocal coping efforts (Monnier et al., 2000). Some coping styles have implications beyond the individual coper. For example, married individuals who respond to stress in a hostile fashion contribute to a negative home environment and they erode social support (Newton, Kiecolt-Glaser, Glaser, & Malarkey, 1995; Smith, 1992; Smith, Sanders, & Alexander, 1990).

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

163

This study of the Black elite, however, raises the question of a legitimate comparison group for future work. Research has demonstrated that the Black upper class report more discrimination than their lower-class peers (Forman et al., 1997; Ren et al., 1997; Williams & Chung, 1997). However, Blacks in the upper class are more likely to use problem-focused coping strategies in dealing with personal problems than their lower-class counterparts (Broman, 1996). Social class position is implicated in these studies where class position affords the individual the resources (monetary, cognitive) to address achievement-related stress. Thus, a comparative study of Black elites and Black non-elites would probably yield few novel results in this area. Of course, it is possible that there are differences in the utility of different strategies across social class boundaries. The other group to whom some may feel a comparison is warranted is non-Black elites, particularly the White elite. There is no information, to the author’s awareness, on the ways in which White elites cope with work stress. Furthermore, there has been no systematic data collection efforts aimed at exploring perceived discrimination among elite Whites. Studies have consistently shown that Whites report significantly less exposure to discrimination than Blacks (see Kessler et al., 1999; Williams et al., 1997), therefore there may be fewer areas on which these two groups could be compared. Given the theoretical basis of the concept of token stress, we might expect female elites to be the most similar to Black elites in their reports of work pressures, especially perceived discrimination (sexism in this case). Since the coping strategies which emerged as beneficial (e.g., social support) and detrimental (e.g., hiding feelings) are found across populations (see Rohde et al., 1990), we would probably find a similar pattern of results for Black and female elites. In fact, an interesting group may be African American women who occupy elite positions. These women must negotiate their race, class, and gender in traditionally White male-dominated domains (see Bailey et al., 1996). In summary, this study contributes to the sociological literature in two ways. First, the sample represents a group of individuals who were alive during a critical timeline in the United States. Many grew up in the Jim Crow era and witnessed a change in the institutional arrangements of society. As you can imagine, then, many of the members of the Black middleclass advocated for the strong self-help ideology described by Booker T. Washington during the Civil Rights Movement. Others probably benefited from government programs (including Head Start, C.E.T.A., and Affirmative Action) established during the 1960s and 1970s. And still others are a part of the growing upper class that have reaped the benefits of the salary

164

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

increases afforded those in the entertainment industry (especially professional sports). Such historical events run the gamut of legal segregation to modern institutional discrimination and racism. Thus, we have here a group of America’s most resilient upwardly mobile adults from whom much can be learned in regards to work experiences. Studies of the network structures of America’s elite suggest that ‘‘yentry into an elite position may not automatically result in full social acceptance by other elites’’ (Alba & Moore, 1982, p. 374). America’s Black elite remain a unique case study that is underrepresented in most areas of sociological inquiry (see Frazier, 1957 for a similar stance), and therefore deserve more attention. The second contribution this study makes is that this group of Black workers provides a broader sample on which to generalize the research on coping effectiveness. White respondents have served as the empirical bases for many of the established relationships described in the coping literature (see Mattlin et al., 1990; Menaghan, 1983). Less attention has been given to whether ethnic minorities cope with similar problems in the same manner as majority group members (see Kuo, 1995; Noh et al., 1999 for exceptions). There may be general processes at work that inform our understanding of larger patterns of group adaptation to work stress. In moving beyond what people do (in their coping efforts) to a better understanding of whether what they do is useful or harmful to their mental health, this article attempts to inform broader theories on coping efficacy.

REFERENCES Alba, R. D., & Moore, G. (1982). Ethnicity in the American elite. American Sociological Review, 47, 373–383. Amirkhan, J. H. (1990). A factor analytically derived measure of coping: The coping strategy indicator. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 59, 1066–1074. Bailey, D., Wolfe, D., & Wolfe, C. (1996). The contextual impact of social support across race and gender: Implications for African American women in the workplace. Journal of Black Studies, 26, 287–307. Barefoot, J. C., Peterson, B. L., Dahlstrom, W. G., Siegler, I. C., Anderson, N. B., & Williams, R. B., Jr. (1991). Hostility patterns and health implications: Correlates of Cook–Medley hostility scale scores in a national survey. Health Psychology, 10, 18–24. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. Benjamin, L. (1991). The Black elite: Facing the color line in the twilight of the twentieth century. Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishers.

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

165

Branscombe, N. R., Schmitt, M. T., & Harvey, R. D. (1999). Perceiving pervasive discrimination among African Americans: Implications for group identification and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 135–149. Broman, C. L. (1996). Coping with personal problems. In: H. W. Neighbors & J. S. Jackson (Eds), Mental health in Black America (pp. 117–129). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Callero, P. L. (1994). From role-playing to role-using: Understanding role as resource. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 228–243. Clark, R., & Anderson, N. B. (2001). Efficacy of racism-specific coping styles as predictors of cardiovascular functioning. Ethnicity and Disease, 11, 286–295. Collins, S. M. (1993). Blacks on the bubble: The vulnerability of Black executives in White corporations. Sociological Quarterly, 34, 429–447. Collins, S. M. (1997). Black corporate executives: The making and breaking of a Black middle class. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Cose, E. (1993). The rage of a privileged class. New York: Harper Collins. Coverman, S. (1989). Role overload, role conflict, and stress: Addressing consequences of multiple role demands. Social Forces, 67, 965–982. Decker, P., & Borgen, F. (1993). Dimensions of work appraisal: Stress, strain, coping, job satisfaction, and negative affectivity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 40, 470–478. Derogatis, L. R., Lipman, R. S., Covi, L., & Rickles, K. (1971). Neurotic symptom dimensions as perceived by psychiatrists and patients of various social classes. Archives of General Psychiatry, 24, 454–464. Ellison, C. (1990). Family ties, friendship, and subjective well-being among Black Americans. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 298–310. Ellison, C. (1993). Religious involvement and self-perception among Black Americans. Social Forces, 71, 1027–1055. Endler, N. S., & Parker, J. D. A. (1990). Coping inventory for stressful situation: Manual. Toronto, ON: Multi-Health systems, Inc. Feagin, J. R., & Sikes, M. P. (1994). Living with racism: The Black middle-class experience. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Fenwick, R., & Tausig, M. (1994). The macroeconomic context of job stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 35, 266–282. Ferris, G. R., Frink, D. D., Bhawuk, D. P. S., Zhou, J., & Gilmore, D. C. (1996). Reactions of diverse groups to politics in the workplace. Journal of Management, 22, 23–44. Finch, B. K., Kolody, B., & Vega, W. A. (2000). Perceived discrimination and depression among Mexican-origin adults in California. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 41, 295–313. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community sample. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 21, 219–239. Forman, T. A., Williams, D. R., & Jackson, J. S. (1997). Race, place, and discrimination. Perspectives on Social Problems, 9, 231–261. Frazier, E. F. (1957). Black bourgeoisie: The rise of a new middle class. New York: The Free Press. Gee, G. (2002). A multilevel analysis of the relationship between institutional and individual racial discrimination and health status. American Journal of Public Health, 92, 615–623. Graham, L. O. (1995). Member of the club. New York: HarperCollins. Henry, C. P. (1981). Ebony elite: America’s most influential Blacks. Phylon, 42, 120–132. Hobfoll, S. E. (Ed.) (1986). Stress, social support, and women. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.

166

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt to conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513–524. Hobfoll, S. E. (2002). Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology, 6, 307–324. Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (1993). Stress and burnout in work organizations. In: R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of organization behavior (pp. 41–61). New York: Dekker. Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (2000). Conservation of resources theory: Applications to stress and management in the workplace. In: R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of organization behavior (pp. 57–81). New York: Dekker. Holahan, C. J., & Moos, R. H. (1991). Life stressors, personal and social resources, and depression: A 4-Year structural model. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 31–38. Jackson, J. W., & Smith, E. R. (1999). Conceptualizing social identity: A new framework and evidence for the impact of different dimensions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 120–135. Jackson, P. B. (1997). Role occupancy and minority mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 38, 237–255. Jackson, P. B. (2004). Role sequencing: Does order matter for mental health? Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 45, 132–154. Jackson, P. B., & Stewart, Q. (2003). A research agenda for the Black middle class: Work stress, survival strategies, and mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 44, 442–455. Jackson, P. B., Thoits, P. A., & Taylor, H. F. (1995). Composition of the workplace and psychological well-being: The effect of tokenism on America’s Black elite. Social Forces, 74, 543–557. Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York, NY: Basic Books. Kessler, R. C., Mickelson, K. D., & Williams, D. R. (1999). The prevalence, distribution, and mental health correlates of perceived discrimination in the United States. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 40, 208–230. Kray, L. J., Thompson, L., & Galinsky, A. (2001). Battle of the sexes: Stereotype confirmation and reactance in negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 942–958. Kuo, W. (1995). Coping with racial discrimination: The case of Asian Americans. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 18, 109–127. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer. Lennon, M. C. (1994). Women, work, and well-being: The importance of work conditions. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 35, 235–247. Lieberson, S., & Carter, D. K. (1979). Making it in America: Difference between eminent Black and white ethnic groups. American Sociological Review, 44, 347–366. Light, K. C., Brownley, K. A., Turner, J. R., Hinderliter, A. L., Girdler, S. S., Sherwood, A., & Anderson, N. B. (1995). Job status and high-effort coping influence work blood pressure in women and blacks. Hypertension, 25, 554–559. Long, B., Kahn, S., & Schutz, R. (1992). Causal model of stress and coping: Women in management. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 39, 227–239. Loscocco, K. A., & Spitze, G. (1990). Working conditions, social support, and the well-being of female and male factory workers. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 31, 313–327. Lykes, M. B. (1983). Discrimination and coping in the lives of black women: Analyses of oral history data. Journal of Social Issues, 39, 79–100.

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

167

Mattlin, J. A., Wethington, E., & Kessler, R. C. (1990). Situational determinants of coping and coping effectiveness. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 31, 103–122. McCrae, R. R. (1984). Situational determinants of coping responses: Loss, threat, and challenge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 919–928. Menaghan, E. G. (1983). Individual coping efforts: Moderators of the relationship between life stress and mental health outcomes. In: H. B. Kaplan (Ed.), Psychosocial stress: Trends in theory and research (pp. 157–191). New York: Academic Press. Menaghan, E. G. (1991). Work experience and family interaction processes: The long reach of the job? Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 419–444. Menaghan, E. G., & Merves, E. S. (1984). Coping with occupational problems: The limits of individual efforts. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 25, 406–423. Messias, D. K. H., Im, E., Page, A., Regev, H., Spiers, J., Yoder, L., & Meiers, A. I. (1997). Defining and redefining work: Implications for women’s health. Gender & Society, 11, 296–323. Moen, P., Robison, J., & Dempster-McClain, D. (1995). Caregiving and women’s well-being: A life course approach. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36, 254–273. Monnier, J., Cameron, R. P., Hobfoll, S. E., & Gribble, J. R. (2000). Direct and crossover effects of prosocial and antisocial coping behaviors. Journal of Family Psychology, 14, 570–584. Neighbors, H. W., Jackson, J. S., Bowman, P. J., & Gurin, G. (1983). Stress, coping, and Black mental health: Preliminary findings from a national study. Prevention in Human Services, 2, 5–29. Newton, T. L., Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., Glaser, R., & Malarkey, W. B. (1995). Conflict and withdrawal during marital interaction: The roles of hostility and defensiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 512–524. Noh, S., Beiser, M., Kaspar, V., Hou, F., & Rummens, J. (1999). Perceived racial discrimination, depression, and coping: A study of southeast Asian refugees in Canada. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 40, 193–207. Oken, D. (1987). Coping and psychosomatic illness. Handbook of psychology and health (Vol. V, pp. 109–135). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Oliver, M. L. (1995). The rage of a privileged class; living with racism: The black middle-class experience; parallel time: Growing up in black and white. Contemporary Sociology, 24, 603–606. Parker, S., & Kleiner, R. J. (1966). Mental illness in the urban Negro community. New York: The Free Press. Parkes, K. (1990). Coping, negative affectivity, and the work environment: Additive and interactive predictors of mental health. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 399–409. Pavalko, E. K., Mossakowski, K. N., & Hamilton, V. J. (2003). Does perceived discrimination affect health? Longitudinal relationships between work discrimination and women’s physical and emotional health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 44, 18–33. Pearlin, L. I. (1989). The sociological study of stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 30, 241–256. Pearlin, L. I., Menaghan, E., Lieberman, M., & Mullan, J. (1981). The stress process. Journal of health and social behavior, 22, 337–356. Pearlin, L. I., & Schooler, C. (1978). The structure of coping. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 19, 2–21.

168

PAMELA BRABOY JACKSON AND TIFFANI SAUNDERS

Pugliesi, K. (1995). Work and well-being: Gender differences in the psychological consequences of employment. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36, 57–71. Rapoport, R., & Rapoport, R. N. (1976). Dual careers reexamined: New integrations of work and family. New York: Harper & Row. Ren, X. S., Amick, B. C., & Levine, S. (1997). Racial/ethnic disparities in health: The interplay between SES and discrimination. Paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Sociological Association, Toronto, CA. Repetti, R. L. (1989). The effects of daily workload on subsequent behavior during marital interaction: The role of social withdrawal and spouse support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 651–659. Rohde, P., Tilson, M., Lewinsohn, P., & Seeley, J. (1990). Dimensionality of coping and its relation to depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 499–511. Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books. Roxburgh, S. (2004). There just aren’t enough hours in the day: The mental health consequences of time pressures. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 32, 115–131. Schulz, A., Williams, D., Israel, B., Becker, A., Parker, E., James, S. A., & Jackson, J. (2000). Unfair treatment, neighborhood effects, and mental health in the Detroit metropolitan area. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 41, 314–332. Selye, H. (1956). The stress of life. New York: McGraw-Hill. Sigelman, L., & Welch, S. (1991). Black Americans’ views of racial inequality. New York: Cambridge University Press. Smith, T. W. (1992). Hostility and health: Current status of a psychosomatic hypothesis. Health Psychology, 11, 139–150. Smith, T. W., Sanders, J. D., & Alexander, J. F. (1990). What does the Cook and Medley Scale measure? Affect, behavior, and attributions in the marital context. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 699–708. Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape the intellectual identities and performance of women and African-Americans. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629. Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Lynch, M. (1993). Self-image resilience and dissonance: The role of affirmational resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 885–896. Stone, A. A., & Neale, J. M. (1984). New measures of daily coping: Development and preliminary results. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 892–906. Tausig, M., Michello, J., & Subedi, S. (1999). A sociology of mental illness. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Taylor, H. F. (1992). The structure of a national Black leadership network: Preliminary findings. Unpublished paper. Department of Sociology, Princeton University. Thoits, P. A. (1983). Multiple identities and psychological well-being: A reformulation and test of the social isolation hypothesis. American Sociological Review, 48, 174–187. Thoits, P. A. (1994). Stressors and problem-solving: The individual as psychological activist. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 35, 143–160. Thoits, P. A. (1995). Stress, coping, and social support processes: Where are we? What next? Journal of Health and Social Behavior (Extra issue), 35, 53–79. Turner, R. J., & Lloyd, D. A. (1995). Lifetime traumas and mental health: The significance of cumulative adversity. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36, 360–376. Voydanoff, P., & Donnelly, B. W. (1989). Economic distress and mental health: The role of family coping resources and behaviors. Lifestyles: Family and Economic Issues, 10, 139–162.

Work Stress, Coping Resources, and Mental Health

169

Williams, D. R., & Chung, A.-M. (1997). Racism and health. In: R. C. Gibson & J. S. Jackson (Eds), Health in Black America. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Williams, D. R., Takeuchi, D. T., & Adair, R. K. (1992). Socioeconomic status and psychiatric disorder among blacks and whites. Social Forces, 71, 179–194. Williams, D. R., Yu, Y., Jackson, J. S., & Anderson, N. (1997). Racial differences in physical and mental health: Socio-economic status, stress and discrimination. Journal of Health Psychology, 2, 335–351. Wright, T. A., & Hobfoll, S. E. (2004). Commitment, psychological well-being and job performance: An examination of conservation of resources (COR) theory and job burnout. Journal of Business Management, 9, 389–406. Yoder, J. D. (1991). Rethinking tokenism: Looking beyond numbers. Gender & Society, 5, 178–192.

APPENDIX: SECTOR LISTS SAMPLED FOR BLACK ELITE Because WWBA includes a large number of locally prominent leaders, it is not an appropriate population list of national influentials. WWA is a key source list because it includes not only government and business leaders but literary figures, academics, entertainers, and sports figures as well (Lieberson & Carter, 1979). The matched list of 960 names is very close to a rough statistical calculation of about 1,000 Blacks in WWA, which can be derived from estimates in Lieberson and Carter (1979). These names were supplemented by lists of national ‘‘influentials published by Ebony magazine periodically since 1963 and yearly since 1971. Ebony editors select each year’s names. Ebony lists tend to overrepresent heads of fraternal organizations and underrepresent literary figures and academics (Henry, 1981). The WWA/WWBA list was compared to the institutional sector lists; all names on the WWA/WWBA list that did not appear in the institutional sector lists were added to the appropriate institutional listing. Generally, disproportionate (equal frequency) stratified sampling by institutional sector was employed (15–20 persons were drawn from each sector list), with random sampling within sectors. However, all Black members of the US Congress in 1984 and Black heads of major philanthropic foundations were purposively included, given the small number of such individuals in each category.

This page intentionally left blank

170

THE MANY ROLES OF CONTROL IN A STRESSOR-EMOTION THEORY OF COUNTERPRODUCTIVE WORK BEHAVIOR Suzy Fox and Paul E. Spector ABSTRACT The Stressor-Emotion model of counterproductive work behavior (CWB) is based on prevalent approaches to emotions, the stress process in general and job stress in particular. The sense of control is key to the appraised coping capacity. A combination of perceived stressors and insufficient control is likely to trigger negative emotions, which in turn increase the likelihood the employee will engage in CWB, which we view as a special case of behavioral strain. We highlight the centrality of several conceptualizations of control in theories of general stress, work stress, and CWB. A critical concern is the paucity of empirical support for the interactive stressorcontrol effects posited by models at all three levels of stress theory. Control that people have or believe they have is a central variable in many models and theories of human behavior both inside and outside the workplace. Control can be considered as an environmental variable, a perception of that environment, or as a personality variable (e.g., locus of control). It has been shown to relate to people’s attitudes, emotions, health, and motivation, as well Employee Health, Coping and Methodologies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 5, 171–201 Copyright r 2006 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(05)05005-5

171

172

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

as behavior. Of particular concern is the role of control in counterproductive work behavior (CWB), which consists of volitional acts that harm or are intended to harm organizations and people in organizations (Spector & Fox, 2005). The Stressor-Emotion model of CWB considers control as an important element at several points. This model is based on prevalent approaches to emotions, the stress process in general and job stress in particular. What counts in the model is not the objective work environment, but rather the individual’s perceptions of environmental challenges and appraisals of his or her ability to cope with these challenges (Lazarus, 1999; Perrewe´ & Zellars, 1999). A negative appraisal triggers negative emotions. These emotions, in turn, are linked to strain responses. In the specific application of the Stressor-Emotion model to CWB, the employee perceives and interprets objective job conditions as constraints, conflicts, or injustice that challenge his or her goal achievement or well-being, and appraises his or her abilities to cope. The sense of control – over one’s own behaviors, over events in one’s social or physical environment, or a combination thereof – is key to the appraised coping capacity. A combination of perceived stressors and insufficient control is likely to trigger negative emotions, which in turn increase the likelihood the employee will engage in CWB. The objective of this chapter is to trace the key path from basic stress theory at the fundamental level of people’s experience of emotions, through the application of stress theory to the more specific domain of the workplace, and finally leading up to our conceptualization of CWB as a special case of behavioral strain in the job stress process. Underlying each level is a theoretical framework that looks at people’s cognitive, physiological, psychological, emotional, and physical responses to environmental events that have implications for survival. We will highlight the centrality of control beliefs in appraisal, coping, emotional, and behavioral processes. While control plays a key role in theories of general stress, work stress, and CWB alike, a critical concern that emerges in this review is the paucity of empirical support for the interactive stressor-control effects posited by models at all three levels of stress theory.

BASIC EMOTION AND STRESS THEORY Emotion Spector and Fox (2002) summarized the core notion of emotion as an adaptive response to challenging environmental events. Plutchik’s (1980)

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

173

psychoevolutionary approach proposes that the existence of an emotion presupposes an evaluation (beneficial or harmful, good or bad) of an environmental event or stimulus, which may lead to an ensuing aroused state. The complex sequence of reactions, including cognitive evaluations, subjective changes, autonomic and neural arousal, impulses to action, and behavior, comprise the emotional experience, and is central to how organisms deal with key survival issues. A related approach views emotion as a functional mechanism whereby highly organized, ongoing activity is interrupted to force attention on urgent events that are relevant to physiological needs or that induce disturbing cognitive associations, such as threats to esteem (Mandler, 1975; Simon, 1967). The function of this process is to energize the individual physiologically and induce appropriate action. Whereas early evolutionary theories focus on threats of physical harm, Lazarus (1999) considers that a person whose goals and beliefs are challenged by environmental events is threatened by psychological harm. Social psychologists such as Schachter and Singer (1962) were early proponents of the view that cognitive interpretation of the environmental events themselves or of the ensuing physiological arousal may determine which particular emotion will be experienced. Lazarus (1982), the theorist most closely associated with the cognitive appraisal perspective on emotion, synthesized cognitive and evolutionary approaches into a notion of emotion, stress, and coping as inextricably linked components of a complex process. The process begins when an individual appraises a situation as significantly impacting his or her relationship with the environment. If he or she appraises the situation as enhancing well-being, a positive emotion will be experienced, whereas a threat to well-being will induce a negative emotion. Certain emotions, such as anger, envy, jealousy, anxiety, fright, guilt, shame, and sadness, can be called ‘‘stress emotions’’ (Lazarus, 1999, p. 36), because they typically arise from conditions appraised as harmful, threatening, or challenging. Depending on a host of personal, cultural, and environmental factors, the individual will appraise his or her capacity to change the situation, self, or interpretation. As we will discuss in more detail later, control is an important element that determines how people appraise situations that have the potential to elicit an emotional response. The experience of a negative emotional state readies a person for action through physiological arousal and focusing of attention. Many instances of a negative emotional state will elicit an immediate and often impulsive response. In many instances, however, the immediate impulse to act is inhibited, with the emotion serving to reinforce intentions and motives to act at a

174

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

subsequent time, often long after the emotion has subsided. This is particularly relevant in the CWB arena where behaviors may often be planned in advance, to be enacted when circumstances provide appropriate opportunities. This is particularly relevant for acts of revenge, which can be instrumental attempts at social control of others (Bies, Tripp, & Kramer, 1997). Findings and theories concerning emotions in general and in the context of stress in particular have been extended to the workplace. Brief and Weiss (2002) distinguished individual from workplace factors that contribute to people’s emotional responses to work. On the individual side are mood cycles over time and personality. Using a daily diary approach, Weiss, Nicholas, and Daus (1999) investigated mood variability over the day in a sample of managers. This study showed that mood was most negative at the beginning of the day and improved over time. Personality has been linked to reports of emotions in both cross-sectional (e.g., Fortunato, Jex, & Heinish, 1999) and longitudinal (Spector & O’Connell, 1994) studies. Workplace factors include job stressors, leadership styles, work group factors, physical aspects of the work settings, and reward systems. Some of these factors have been linked to both negative emotions and CWB, including stressors (e.g., Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001) and leadership style (Bruursema & Spector, 2005). Perrewe´ and Zellars (1999) adapted and extended Lazarus’ (1982) transactional model of stress to organizational settings, with emotion as a central element. They included the potential effects of attributions in determining the specific emotional response to a situation. For example, if an individual is unable to complete a task, he or she is likely to experience guilt if failure is attributed to an internal and controllable cause (lack of effort), but is likely to experience frustration if there is an external and uncontrollable cause (lack of sufficient resources). Furthermore, the nature of the attributions and emotion helps determine reactions, with internal controllable attributions leading to constructive problem solving, whereas uncontrollable and external attributions tend to lead to emotion focused approaches, which can include withdrawal and perhaps other forms of CWB, although they note that concerns over being punished will tend to discourage such behavior in organizations at least initially.

Stress One of Lazarus’ key contributions was the synthesis of previously separate emotions and stress literatures. Our Stressor-Emotion model reflects his view of the inextricability of stress and emotion (Lazarus, 1999; Perrewe´ & Zellars,

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

175

1999) in a process of responses to stimuli perceived as threatening or harmful. The multilevel responses include cognitive, emotional, physiological, and behavioral responses to transactions with the environment. The stress literature (Spector, 1998) emphasizes that an environmental stressor, for example an objective feature of the workplace, must be perceived as a stressor, in order for the stress process to continue. Stress is not a response to the objective environment (if such exists), but rather derives from the relational meaning or personal significance of the person– environment relationship (Lazarus, 1999). The presumption is that people monitor their environments, and through the appraisal process, interpret situations as stressors, based on such factors as the extent to which the individual perceives a threat to well-being, the degree to which a situation might interfere with goals or ongoing activity, and the individual’s attributions about the causes of events (Spector & Fox, 2005). Once the environmental event is perceived as harmful or threatening, stress occurs if the person appraises his or her adaptive resources as strained or inadequate to meet the challenge. Lazarus (1995) suggests people’s appraisal of their abilities to meet environmental challenges, and the resulting emotions, may motivate behavior that will reduce negative feelings and enhance positive feelings. Coping consists of cognitive and behavioral efforts a person makes to manage demands that tax or exceed his or her personal resources. This can be accomplished through problem-focused coping, direct action designed to change the environment itself, or through an emotion-focused approach designed to reduce the negative impact on the individual. Problem-focused coping consists of behavioral strategies concerned with altering or managing the source of the stressful encounter. Whereas Lazarus tends to view problem-focused coping as constructive actions in response to stress, Spector and Fox (2002) point out it is also possible to take direct action that might eliminate the immediate cause of a negative emotion, but in a destructive way, harming another individual or a larger social unit. This becomes one link to CWB. If the person judges nothing can be done to change the situation directly (i.e., the situation cannot be controlled), he or she might take an emotion-focused approach. Emotion-focused coping involves cognitive, intra-psychic, or behavioral efforts to reduce or manage emotional distress, without addressing the situational causes. It can include regulation of stressful emotions, intellectualization, social isolation, or suppression of reality. These actions might include avoiding the situation (withdrawal) or striking back surreptitiously to make the person feel better by ‘‘evening the score’’, even though the cause of the stressor has not been addressed.

176

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

Not all perceived stressors lead to intense emotions, nor to immediate behavioral responses (Spector, 1998). Powerful perceived stressors, such as being fired, will likely result in immediate anger and anxiety. Emotional responses to workload, on the other hand, may be quite mild and have a cumulative effect over time, with only gradually increasing fatigue and pressure leading to escalating emotion. Once again, many personal factors interact with stressors, cognitive appraisals, and strain outcomes. Emotions play multiple roles in the process. For example, emotional state at a point in time will affect how a person perceives and appraises a situation – an environmental event encountered while in a negative emotional state will be more likely to be perceived as a stressor than when in a positive emotional state. Basic emotional tendencies (e.g., trait anger or trait anxiety; Spielberger & Sydeman, 1994) play a major role in the behavioral outcomes of the process (Fox & Spector, 1999). Perhaps the key intermediary factor in the progression of the stress process is control. The proposition that control impacts all stages of the individual’s perceptions, appraisals, coping choices, and strain responses is central to leading theories of stress upon which we have based our stress and CWB research – most notably the work of Karasek (1979), Karasek and Theorell (1990), Lazarus (1995), and Lazarus and Folkman (1984). However, the notion of control has often been oversimplified, and the range, levels, and directions of control have been overlooked. The central theme of this chapter is, indeed, to deconstruct (or de-construct) this singular notion into just a few of its many forms, manifestations, and meanings. We submit that only when the specific identification of relevant control is matched with the specific antecedents and outcomes of the stress process (job stress in general and CWB in particular), will our empirical research succeed in providing support for our theoretical linkages. Control in the General Stress Process In basic stress theory, Thompson (1981) defines control as the belief that one has at one’s disposal a response that can influence the aversiveness of an event. Control does not need to be exercised for it to be effective; in fact, it does not need to be real, as long as it is perceived. The perception of control over the particular stressors is part of the appraisal mechanism, and reduces the likelihood of negative emotional responses and strain. Another twist on the notion of the benefits of perceived – even though unexercised – control is proposed by Ganster (1988), based on Miller’s (1979) ‘‘minimax hypothesis’’. If an individual perceives the availability of a control response,

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

177

s/he is likely to believe the situation will not become unbearable, and will therefore be able to tolerate higher levels of stressful stimuli. Ganster (1988) further expands the domain of control to include predictability as a potential ameliorator of the stress process. Whereas control implies the ability to influence the environment, predictability may allow the individual to choose or develop adequate coping mechanisms without actually changing the stressful situation. Averill (1973) distinguished among several types of control: Behavioral control is the availability of a response, which may directly influence or modify the objective characteristics of a threatening event (this is similar to Lazarus’ problem-solving coping). Cognitive control affects the way an event is interpreted, appraised, or incorporated into a cognitive plan, in order to reduce long-term stress and psychic costs of adaptation. Informational control is having warning signals prior to aversive stimulus (enhancing prediction so one knows when to relax). Finally, decisional control is the perceived opportunity to choose among various acceptable courses of action. In this chapter, we suggest that various kinds of control provide key input at several stages of the stress process. At the earliest stage, a person who feels ‘‘in control’’ is less likely to perceive environmental conditions as threatening. Even the most elementary perception of a situation, however, is not isolated from evaluating what might be done about it, that is, coping (Lazarus, 1999). One’s sense of being able to cope with the threatening situation, and the manner in which one will cope, also derive in part from perceptions and beliefs of one’s ability to control the environment, oneself, or both. Another distinction related to stress is between primary and secondary control (Rothbaum, Weisz, & Snyder, 1982). Primary control is taking direct action to affect the environment and is what is normally considered in our control research. The individual attempts to adapt the world to himself or herself, and sees the world as directly modifiable through personal action. It is reflected in most of our control concepts, such as autonomy or the internal side of locus of control. Secondary control concerns adapting the self to the environment, and is used when primary control is unavailable. Rothbaum et al. (1982) list four forms of secondary control. Predictive control is action taken to increase certainty about what will happen in the future. This can be accomplished in both productive (gathering information) or unproductive (intentional failure) ways. The latter might result in CWB in which an individual might purposely avoid doing work so that he or she will be better able to predict the outcome. Illusory control is making attributions to chance, and can be seen in people who prefer chance situations (e.g., gambling) and engaging in superstitious behavior. Vicarious control

178

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

can be accomplished by seeking out and affiliating with those who have power in organizations, such as influential managers. Interpretive control has to do with finding meaning in events that have occurred. This is a form of cognitive control that might involve seeking religious significance in events or seeing them as God’s will. Primary and secondary control can be linked in some ways to problemfocused versus emotion-focused coping. Primary control, like problem-focused coping, concerns direct action to resolve a situation, and secondary control, like emotion-focused coping, concerns an individual adapting the self to a situation and controlling the emotional response. However, coping is concerned specifically with response to stressors, whereas control does not necessarily involve stressful situations. Furthermore, control is often used to avoid stressors rather than adapt to them. Finally, secondary control can be used to support primary control, and can be part of a strategy to effect change. For example, an individual can collect information that enables him or her to be in the right place at the right time to accomplish something that cannot be done through primary control means. This can involve associating with those in power who are in a position to exert primary control. Emotion-focused coping concerns more adapting and making the best of a situation rather than changing the situation. Critics have noted that the notion of primary and secondary control may be biased by Western individualistic assumptions. What a Western observer might consider secondary control, could, to a member of a more collectivist culture, be a form of primary control, notably attempts to change the environment not through one’s own direct action, but rather through the actions of others. In response to these criticisms, a third form of control, socioinstrumental control, was introduced (Spector, Sanchez, Siu, Salgado, & Ma, 2004), referring to beliefs about changing the environment through social means. Thus in contrasting US and Chinese employees, the difference is not whether individuals believe it is possible or desirable to change the world, but rather ‘‘ywhere a Westerner might believe he or she can just change the world, the Asian believes he or she must convince the group to change the world’’ (p. 43). Preliminary research supported the proposition that in collectivist cultures, socioinstrumental control may serve as another form of primary control, and should be incorporated into job stress research to more fully explain people’s responses to work stressors. Personal factors (personality, beliefs, expectations, motives, and commitments) influence attention and appraisal, as individuals actively select and shape experiences according to their requirements. As we will see later, several of these factors involve control beliefs, such as self-efficacy, locus of control,

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

179

and learned helplessness. Cultural factors (such as assumptions about mankind’s control over nature, emotion display rules, social norms, and behavioral expectations) play a role as well in determining the valence, intensity, and other facets of the emotional response (e.g., see Fessler, 2004 on collectivist/ individualist influences on the experience of guilt versus shame). Organizational factors include climate, culture, change, interventions, and job design. The individual’s experience with the specifics of the particular environment is central, as judgments of control color perceptions of social relationships, norms, and action latitude. The notion of ‘‘hot cognition’’ links affect and social reasoning at the most basic level of memory and cognitive processing (Lodge & Taber, 2000). Altogether, this synchronized interplay of affect and cognition, perception and evaluation, control and vulnerability, results in the immense human variability in appraisals of situations, which in turn results in the immense variability in emotions and ultimately behavioral reactions.

WORK STRESS The Basic Stress Model Applied to Work Stress Figure 1 illustrates a simplified model of the basic stress process, which we now apply to work stress. It shows a causal flow from the environment to perception/appraisal of the work environment to emotion to behavior. Individuals

Objective environment

Personal factors

Perceived stressors

Appraisal (coping)

Negative emotions

Control

Fig. 1.

Basic Stress Model.

Strain

180

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

are presumed to monitor their physical and social environments continually over time. Some conditions and situations are perceived as stressors through the appraisal process in that they induce negative emotional responses. This might be because they are seen as interference with ongoing activities and goals (e.g., organizational constraints, Peters & O’Connor, 1980), or as a threat to well-being. Negative emotions in turn affect psychological (e.g., job dissatisfaction), physical (e.g., physiological arousal and somatic symptoms), and behavioral (e.g., alcohol consumption and CWB) strains. The causal flow in the figure, as in most job stress process models, is from left to right, focusing on the impact of the work environment on perceptions, appraisal, and strains. A more dynamic view, however, recognizes that causation can run in multiple directions. Rather than being a passive recipient of the environment, individuals both interact with and affect their environment. For example, an individual who engages in CWB directed against coworkers may in turn be the target of similar behavior by the same coworkers, which would be perceived as a stressor. Furthermore, an individual who is dissatisfied with the job may be hyper-responsive to certain organizational actions which in turn may color evaluations of aspects of the job, such as justice. Control and personality have impact at various portions of the model. Control is particularly important in an individual’s appraisal of a situation. Events that are seen as controllable are likely to be seen as challenges and even opportunities rather than threats to well-being. Responses to such situations will likely be constructive and unemotional. Uncontrollable situations that threaten well-being, on the other hand, will be appraised as stressors that may elicit anger or anxiety. This may well lead to strains and unconstructive actions from an organizational point of view, such as CWB. Personality traits can affect perceptions, appraisal, emotionality, and responses to stressors. Traits can be relevant to how people perceive situations through their beliefs and perceptions of control. For example, individuals with an internal locus of control are predisposed to view situations as controllable, and are less likely to appraise situations in a threatening way. Likewise, individuals high in self-efficacy concerning a domain are unlikely to appraise domain-specific challenges, such as a new work assignment, as stressors. We now continue with our analysis of control in the stress process as applied to work stress. Control and Work Stress General stress theory has been greatly enriched with the recognition of the various roles control plays in the appraisal and emotional/physiological/

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

181

behavioral response processes. As we will discuss in detail, there are many different control-related constructs that can be related to work stress. Some are personality variables that reflect people’s tendencies to believe they have control over a wide range of situations, such as locus of control or selfefficacy (generalized or domain-specific). Others are concerned with a person’s ability to directly affect the work environment, including autonomy, behavioral latitude, and participation. Finally, others may be inherent in people (e.g., personal resources) or situations (empowerment and organizational change). We will discuss each type in turn. As in our discussion of general stress, we distinguish between the control inherent in the environment and perceptions of control. Although it is the perception of control that is most important for the stress process, the connection between the environment and perception is important as well. Different individuals in the same work environment may perceive different levels of control for a variety of reasons; at the same time, the apparently ‘‘same’’ work environment may actually differ for different employees within the organization or workgroup. Policies and rules that proscribe the limits of employee control may not be clear and if clear might not be enforced. For example, an organization may have a written policy that all employees must arrive at work at a specific time, but individuals who deviate are not challenged. Some employees might perceive this to mean that they have control over their work schedule, whereas others may believe that they do not, and that it is just a matter of time before those who are violating policy are punished. Still other employees may perceive this inconsistency as evidence of injustice or preferential treatment. It is important to distinguish between formal and informal control, as it is to distinguish between actual and illusory control. Although the formal organizational structure may limit control, informal norms may arise that allow for increased or even decreased employee control. In some cases this arises because certain practices become established and management is reluctant to risk conflict over enforcing rules. In other cases management might delegate control to workgroups or teams that may restrict individual control, or what Langfred (2000) refers to as Type 1 self-management work group design. Barker (1993) critically analyzes this transformation of control over individual employees from bureaucratic (hierarchical) control to the ‘‘concertive control’’ of self-managing work teams. Rather than enhancing the well-being of workers, this reorganization of work may in fact result in a new, more powerful type of control over the individual, in which the development and enforcement of strict behavioral norms shifts from management to the teammates themselves. Individuals may experience a

182

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

substantial loss of control in the migration to self-managed team-based job design, as they find little room for escape from the ‘‘tutelary eye of the norm’’ (p. 432). Workers in Barker’s study report a substantial escalation of stress, as they experience what Barker refers to as the development of a Foucauldian system of total control that is almost impossible to resist (Foucault, 1976). In job stress research, control has been most commonly conceptualized as job-design autonomy, participative decision-making, and global control beliefs (locus of control). We suggest that a number of further factors might be considered as well. At the personal level, these might include self-efficacy, optimism, and learned helplessness; at the cultural level, belief in control versus harmony with nature, and even power distance, interpreted as the right of an individual to assert control regardless of hierarchical position; at the organizational level, perceptions of power, justice, and culture, as well as resources that enable task and social support. Karasek’s (1979) demand-control (originally demand-decision latitude) model proposes that adverse psychological strain results from a combination of high psychological demands of the job (e.g., requirements for working fast and hard or conflicting demands) and low decision latitude (the worker’s authority to make decisions on the job combined with the breadth of skills used by the worker on the job). Strain occurs when the job is simultaneously high in demands and low in control. In contrast, positive outcomes (e.g., motivation and learning) occur when individual occupies an ‘‘active’’ job, including both a high level of psychological demands and high level of control. More recently, Karasek revised this model as the Demand–Control– Support (DCS) model, including support alongside control as a moderator of the stressor–strain relationship. Karasek and Theorell (1990) argue that social support on the job may facilitate coping in much the same way as do control beliefs, thereby preventing or ameliorating strain responses to highdemand jobs. Van Yperen and Hagedoorn (2003) share our emphasis that the kind of support and control must match the specific stressors in order to facilitate successful coping. They provide evidence, for example, that instrumental support and autonomy increase intrinsic motivation and reduce fatigue in high-demand jobs (although the predicted demands–support interaction was not found for fatigue). While Karasek’s demand-control theory is widely endorsed, very little empirical support has been found for the moderating effect of control. De Jonge and Kompier (1997) note that the interactive effects of demands, decision latitude, and social support are seldom found, or, if found are weak

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

183

or in a direction not predicted by the model. Karasek’s operationalization of control (specifically, his measure of decision latitude) has been criticized as containing job elements that do not represent control, such as skill utilization, task variety, creativity required, or learning opportunities (Ganster, 1988; Smith, Tisak, Hahn, & Schmieder, 1997; Wall & Jackson, 1996). This weakness was demonstrated in a study by Wall and Jackson (1996), in which the moderating role of control was tested using two different measures of control: Karasek’s decision latitude and a more focused measure of timing and method control. The interaction between job demands and the focused control measure predicted job strain (intrinsic job satisfaction, depression, and anxiety), whereas the interaction between job demands and Karasek’s decision latitude did not. Ganster (1988) suggests that for control to be a factor, it must be conceptualized as a multi-faceted construct to match the specific stressors encountered in the workplace. He developed a measure that addressed seven work domains in which individuals may or may not have control: work tasks, work pacing, work scheduling, physical environment, decision-making, interactions with other people, and mobility. In addition, he included predictability, which arguably provides many of the benefits of control in people’s coping processes, without actually changing the stressful environment. Similarly, Bacharach, Bamberger, Conley, and Bauer (1990) argue that decision participation must be evaluated on multiple domains, if we are to find empirical support for the theorized role of that form of control in work stress. Individual differences in desired levels of participation must be taken into account, as one employee might view decision participation as a stressor in itself, while another might find that participation provides the wherewithal to successfully cope with job demands. They therefore define evaluative participation as the discrepancy between perceived and expected or desired levels of participation in decision-making. They propose a typology of participation domains based on two dimensions of decisionmaking: strategic versus operational and individual versus organizational. An additional critique of research attempting to provide empirical support for the moderating role of control is the assumption of linearity. A curvilinear relationship between level of control and strain has been suggested (de Jonge & Kompier, 1997), in that too little control contributes to stress, but too much control is disadvantageous when it leads to perceptions of too much responsibility or too complex decision-making. We have now set the stage for our conceptualization of CWB as a special case of job stress. In the remainder of this chapter, we will apply the abovedelineated facets of the stress process to our understanding of CWB as a

184

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

manifestation of behavioral strain. Our focus will be on the many roles of the many aspects of control in this process, and on our less than stellar success in providing empirical support for these theorized linkages between control and CWB.

COUNTERPRODUCTIVE WORK BEHAVIOR Stressor-Emotion Model of CWB There are many forms of CWB, and many theoretical frameworks for understanding its dynamics. The Stressor-Emotion model makes no claim to explain all forms of CWB, nor to fully explain the infinite variability of dispositional, perceptual, cognitive, emotional, instrumental, political, cultural, and organizational factors that differentially inform each instance of person–environment interaction. The model may not be relevant to carefully crafted, instrumentally strategic harmful behaviors such as designing computer code to steal from the organization, nor to ethically motivated behavior that is viewed as counterproductive by management, such as mindful whistle-blowing. However, we submit that the model draws upon the rich scholarly heritage of emotions and stress research to illuminate a large chunk of the CWB domain. The workplace is an environment that is rife with the experience and expression of strong emotion. It is the source of both physical (e.g., money) and psychological (e.g., esteem) need fulfillment. Individuals monitor workplace events, and those deemed as particularly relevant for enhancing or hurting well-being will tend to induce emotion (Spector & Fox, 2002). A situation that induces a negative emotion will increase the likelihood that dysfunctional or counterproductive behavioral responses will occur, either to actively and directly attack the agent of the situation or to passively and indirectly cope with the emotion (e.g., by avoiding work or drinking alcohol). One of the complexities of this process is that emotion does not automatically or necessarily invoke behavior, and resulting behavior need not occur immediately. Rather emotion increases the likelihood of certain behavioral intentions, which may result in behaviors occurring later when opportunities arise. Adding to the complexity is the interplay of short-term and long-term effects of stressors. Short-term emotional effects may include boredom as well as the generally studied anger and anxiety, while short-term behavioral effects may include spontaneous verbal or withdrawal behaviors. Long-term emotional effects may include learned helplessness and associated depression

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

185

(Seligman, 1975), while long-term behavioral effects may involve the conscious, intentional planning of retaliatory behavior, such as sabotage or theft. The Stressor-Emotion model builds upon our earlier work frustrationaggression theory (Fox & Spector, 1999), which in turn was based upon the classic Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer, and Sears’ (1939) frustrationaggression hypothesis. Their notion of frustration, the interference with a person’s goals or ongoing activity, is compatible with Lazarus’ (1999) view of a stressor as an environmental condition that blocks or threatens to block attainment of an important personal goal. The Stressor-Emotion model reflects the complexity of the past several decades of stress and workplace aggression research, adding the key components of personality, emotion, justice cognitions, attributions, and control. Figure 2 illustrates the Stressor-Emotion model as applied specifically to CWB. As in Fig. 1, we see a causal flow from the environment to perception/ appraisal of the environment to emotion to behavior, moderated at all points by perceived control (Spector & Fox, 2005). We do not suggest that this model represents the only possible causal flow, but merely indicates some critical links in the CWB process. Causality likely runs in many directions. For example, CWB has effects on the environment, and may well make it more stressful. Emotional state at a point in time will affect how a person perceives and appraises a situation. Thus an environmental event encountered while in a negative emotional state will be more likely to be

Objective Work environment

Personal factors

Perceived constraints, conflict, injustice

Appraisal (coping)

Negative emotions

Control: locus of control, autonomy

Fig. 2.

Stressor-Emotion Model of CWB.

CWBorganization CWBperson

186

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

perceived as a stressor than when in a positive emotional state. Control perceptions affect every response in the model, and in turn, the responses may result in altered control perceptions. While the dynamic of CWB is probably iterative and reciprocal at all levels, the basic analytic model proceeds from left to right. The stressors we have studied in our CWB research include situational constraints, interpersonal conflict, and perceived injustice. We have found links between these stressors and negative emotion composites as well as individual emotions such as anger, anxiety, frustration, and boredom (Fox & Spector, 1999; Van Katwyk, Fox, Spector, & Kelloway, 2000). Both stressors and emotion in turn have been found to predict both composite CWB measures, and categories such as CWB directed at organizations versus people (Robinson & Bennett, 1995) or Abuse, Production Deviance, Sabotage, Theft, and Withdrawal (Spector et al., in press). We have found robust support for the mediating role of emotion in the relations between stressors and CWB (Fox & Spector, 1999; Fox et al., 2001). In a previous section, we introduced a multi-faceted notion of control as a critical element in emotion, general stress theory, and job stress. In the next section, we look at control as it impacts the process of CWB.

Control and CWB We have proposed that control is an important element in CWB (Spector & Fox, 2005). There are two places in which one might expect control to have a pronounced effect. First, controllable situations are less likely to be perceived as stressors and therefore will be less likely to result in negative emotions (Spector, 1998). Imagine this scenario: An individual is on tight deadline when an emergency request comes down from upper management for an additional report requiring extensive research. If the person believes he or she can juggle the ‘normal workload’, that is, has sufficient task autonomy, he or she may see the additional report as a minor annoyance that might delay normal task completion for a short while. If on the other hand, the person does not believe he or she can rearrange or restructure the timing and priority of tasks, the person is likely to experience anger and/or anxiety over not being able to complete the work. The harsher the consequences (e.g., being fired), the more intense the emotional response is likely to be. The second place control plays a role is in the response to emotion and how it leads to CWB. Human aggression can be a response to a sense of

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

187

powerlessness. Allen and Greenberger (1980) suggested that persons with lowered perceived control may attempt to modify their environment and restore their feelings of control through destructive acts. The importance of control in both basic stress and work stress models (Karasek, 1979; Lazarus, 1995) has been emphasized. However, control or control perceptions must be relevant to the stressor in question to affect an individual’s response to that stressor. This is particularly critical in our understanding of CWB, which is a broad categorization of many different types of behaviors in response to many different types of job stressors. Having autonomy to set workloads, for example, may reduce the perception of workload as a stressor, but it will be unlikely to have much impact on interpersonal conflict as a social stressor. This is an important issue because there has been little attempt to assess control that is directly relevant to the stressors in question. In most cases, control instruments measure a too limited or too global range of control, such as autonomy in doing the job or global locus of control beliefs. Different research on job stress in general or CWB in particular has focused on different concepts of control. Two of the most frequently studied control variables in job stress research are autonomy and locus of control.

Autonomy Autonomy is the extent to which individual employees can structure and control how, when, and where they do their particular job tasks (Spector, 1986). This is related to Karasek’s (1979) notion of decision latitude, which is defined as potential control over tasks and conduct, and includes ‘‘decision authority’’ and ‘‘intellectual discretion’’ (p. 290). Autonomy includes determining the order and pacing of job tasks, specific procedures, scheduling, and coordination with other employees and other work conditions. A person who believes he or she has greater autonomy on the job is more likely to believe he or she can change things when job demands or conditions appear threatening. Lazarus (1999) suggests that when conditions are appraised as changeable, problem-focused coping predominates, whereas when the realities of the stressful situation appear unchangeable, emotionfocused coping is more likely to occur. Whereas problem-focused coping is not necessarily productive nor emotion-focused coping counterproductive, on the whole the purpose of problem-focused coping is to change the troubled person–environment relationship, which in turn may reduce the negative emotions that ensue from a perceived incapacity to deal with the threatening situation.

188

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

Autonomy has typically been measured with the component from Hackman and Oldham’s (1975) Job Diagnostic Survey or JDS, which has been shown to correlate with stress-related responses, such as anxiety, intention of quitting the job, job satisfaction, and physical symptoms (e.g., Spector, Dwyer, & Jex, 1988; see also reviews by Ganster & Fusilier, 1989; Terry & Jimmieson, 1999). However, Spector and Fox (2003) criticized this measure as being rather general and nonspecific, with items that allow subjective judgments to interfere with measurement of actual work conditions. They developed a more specific measure of control at work, the Factual Autonomy Scale (FAS). In the FAS, participants are asked whether they must ask permission to take certain actions, such as take a rest break. In addition, they are asked to what extent someone tells them what tasks they are to do or how, when, or where they are to do tasks. Only a handful of studies have investigated relationships between autonomy and CWB. Using the FAS, Bruursema and Spector (2005) with employed students and Fox et al. (2001) with a mix of employed students and employees of several American organizations found a significant correlation between autonomy and CWB directed toward organizations (r ¼
0.18 and
0.25, respectively), but not between autonomy and CWB directed toward other people (r ¼
0.11 and
0.05, respectively). On the other hand, in an Israeli study, Vardi and Weitz (2003) with individuals at a personnel placement center for career transition found a significant 0.26 correlation between the Breaugh (1985) autonomy scale and overall CWB. Those individuals with more autonomy reported engaging in more CWB. Whether the opposite findings are due to cultural differences between Israel and the US or the nature of the samples which differed among the studies is unclear. Furthermore, these conflicting findings might suggest that relationships between autonomy and CWB are complex and subject to contextual factors. As described above, Ganster (1988) developed a measure of control over several domains of work. Several of his items overlap with autonomy, including control over work methods, scheduling, time one comes to work and leaves, and how one does one’s work. Dwyer and Ganster (1991) found that this measure of control interacted with mental and physical demands (objectively measured stressors from job analysis data) to predict unexcused absences and tardiness, which we have argued are withdrawal forms of CWB. It is also possible that autonomy can help employees control the degree to which they are targets of CWB. Grandey, Dickter, and Sin (2004) surveyed customer service employees about their experiences of aggressive behavior

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

189

by customers. Autonomy as assessed with the JDS autonomy scale was significantly related to customer verbal aggression (r ¼
0.22). Since all variables were part of the same cross-sectional questionniare, it is possible that autonomy affected employee interpretations of customer interactions so that they were seen as less aggressive and threatening if the employee perceived having control. In fact autonomy was correlated with the appraised stressfulness of customer aggressive responses (r ¼
0.39). Nevertheless, given that CWB can potentially be affected by social stressors such as being verbally aggressed against, autonomy might be expected to influence employee CWB to the extent it affects perceptions of social interactions. We have also suggested that autonomy can moderate the relationship between stressors and CWB. To date we have only a single test of this proposition (Fox et al., 2001). Out of eight tests, only two were significant showing that autonomy moderated the relationship between both conflict and distributive justice with CWB directed against people. However, the relationship was opposite to expectations, with those high in autonomy showing the stronger relationship of CWB with conflict and distributive justice. Clearly, more research is needed to investigate the potential moderating relationship of autonomy in the CWB process.

Locus of Control Locus of control is a belief system (informed by personality, culture, and life experience) regarding the extent to which one’s outcomes and rewards in life are due to one’s own actions (an internal locus) or by fate, luck, deity, or other people (external locus). A body of research has demonstrated that individuals with internal locus of control are better able to handle work stress. Kobasa (1979) found internal locus of control to moderate the stress– illness relationship among business executives. Judge, Thoresen, Pucik, and Welbourne (1999) found locus of control (internality) to be correlated with both self- and independent assessments of ability to cope with organizational change. Internals perceive less stress (Anderson, 1977) and have demonstrated a preference for problem-focused (or task-centered) coping over emotion-focused coping (Anderson, 1977; Judge et al., 1999). Thus it might be expected that internals would be more likely than externals to engage in constructive behavior to solve problems and be less likely to engage in CWB in response to stressors and other challenges. Spector (1988) developed a scale that measures control beliefs in the specific domain of the work organization. The idea of domain specificity is that

190

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

control beliefs about the work setting may be better predictors of work behavior than more general scales (Phares, 1976). Work locus of control has been found to correlate significantly with stress-related variables in our model such as job satisfaction, intention of quitting, perceived influence at work, and role stressors (Spector, 1988). Research on both general and work locus of control has shown that internals are less alienated from the work environment and less likely to commit counterproductive behaviors in response to work frustration (Fox & Spector, 1999). Heacox (1996) found external locus of control to be related to aggression against others. Similarly, Perlow and Latham (1993) showed that employees with an external locus of control were more likely to be terminated for abusing clients of a residential facility. Storms and Spector (1987) found locus of control to moderate the relation between frustration and CWB. For externals but not internals there was a significant relationship between frustration at work and CWB.

Self-Efficacy Self-efficacy is the belief in one’s capability to perform successfully in a specific task domain (Bandura, 1986). In a sense this is the belief that one has control over task accomplishment. This relates directly to the way people respond to challenges from the work environment, that is, to work stressors. Individuals who score high on self-efficacy tend to try harder to master the challenge of difficult situations, show more persistence in the face of obstacles, respond to negative feedback with increased effort and motivation, set more challenging goals, and work harder and longer to achieve them. Bandura emphasizes the central role perceived self-efficacy plays in stress reactions when people face potential environmental threats. A person who is high in self-efficacy, that is, who believes he or she can exercise control over potential threats, is less likely to conjure up apprehensive cognitions leading to anxiety or other negative emotions. High self-efficacy has been shown to be associated with the tendency to use problem-focused rather than emotion-focused coping strategies (Jex & Bliese, 1999). Individuals with high self-efficacy may also self-select into high-scope jobs and work environments that offer a greater degree of autonomy (Jex & Bliese, 1999). Bandura and colleagues (Wiedenfeld, O’Leary, Bandura, & Brown, 1990) found direct experimental evidence that perceived self-efficacy in coping with psychological stressors mitigated the detrimental immunological effects of stress (e.g., heart rate and cortisol activation). Jex and colleagues (Jex &

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

191

Bliese, 1999; Jex, Bliese, Buzzell, & Primeau, 2001) found that self-efficacy moderated stressor–strain relationships. Employees with high self-efficacy showed lower psychological and physical strain responses to stressors such as work overload and role ambiguity. A related notion, collective or grouplevel efficacy, may offer a positive, cooperative climate and the kinds of social support that have been demonstrated to mitigate the negative effects of job stressors (Jex & Bliese, 1999). We could find no research addressing the connection between self-efficacy and CWB. However, we would hypothesize that self-efficacy would moderate the relationship between task-related environmental conditions and perceived stressors (such as organizational constraints) and between perceived stressors and CWB. In other words individuals who have high task self-efficacy would perceive fewer constraints and would see constraints as easily overcome. Furthermore, they would be likely to respond to stressors and subsequent emotionality constructively to the extent that they are likely to perceive themselves as capable of effectively coping with those stressors. Thus, they are unlikely to engage in CWB in response to task-related stressors. Studies that consider the role of self-efficacy at both the individual and group level are needed in order to test these suppositions.

Personal Resources The variables discussed so far look at people’s perceptions of control, an emphasis at the core of the Stressor-Emotion model. However, we should not ignore objective features of the environment that contribute to both perceptions and the actual behavioral choices available to individuals. These include personal resources and behavioral latitude. Personal resources ‘‘influence what we are able and unable to do as we seek to gratify needs, attain goals, and cope with the stresses produced by demands, constraints, and opportunities’’ (Lazarus, 1999, p. 71). Examples are finances, education, social support, intelligence, social skills, health, and physical attractiveness. We speculate that personal resources might work either way – they might enhance more positive appraisals, problem-focused coping, and functional resolutions of potentially stressful encounters. On the other hand, they might promote ‘‘entitlement’’ perspectives (increasing the probability that an individual might tend toward hyper-vigilant perceptions of injustice), and they might provide individuals with the behavioral latitude to respond counterproductively. Research is needed that addresses how personal resources can influence CWB. Research thus far on individual differences in CWB has focused on

192

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

personality characteristics rather than variables that reflect personal resources. Behavioral Latitude While most of the forms of control discussed so far tend to decrease CWB, some forms of power and access to critical organizational resources (such as computer files, clients, or money) may actually encourage employees to perform CWB. In fact, opportunity is considered one of the leading causes of employee theft (Mustaine & Tewksbury, 2002). Fox and Spector (1999) found this latitude (e.g., ‘‘If I wanted to, I could find a way to hurt my company or mess things up at work without being caught’’) to be among the strongest predictors of CWB. This might explain some mixed findings for autonomy, as those with higher autonomy are likely to be in higher power positions, making it easier for them to respond to stressors by engaging in CWB against others. This serves as a warning against simplistic stress theories that assume perceptions of control in coping appraisals will invariably lead to problem-oriented coping, or that problem-oriented coping is necessarily functional/productive. This may explain the positive correlation between autonomy and CWB in the Vardi and Weitz (2003) study. Those with more autonomy had more opportunities to engage in CWB or were in positions where they were less likely to be punished. Participation Participative decision-making is a theme that intercepts contemporary human resource management processes, including self-managed work teams, employee involvement initiatives, and co-determination. In contrast to autonomy, which is a kind of micro-control over an individual’s own job tasks, participation involves more global decision-making (Spector, 1998), and may not be relevant to the job stressors that challenge an individual in an immediate and personal way. On the other hand, organizational processes that include participative decision-making may result in a climate of perceived beneficence, justice, support, and heightened positive mood, all of which may increase the likelihood that organization members will appraise environmental events as less threatening to their well-being or ability to cope. The study of the effects of participatory decision-making and workplace democracy on job stress has more commonly been done in Europe than in the United States. Mikkelsen and Gundersen (2003), for example, studied a structured organizational intervention in the Norwegian Postal Service, designed to increase worker control through workgroup meetings

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

193

and activities, increased management–employee dialogue, job redesign, and individual and organizational learning. They found positive improvements in job stress and subjective health complaints, but these were temporary and limited in the longitudinal study. In a participative action research (PAR) study of UK civil servants, Bond and Bunce (2001) found that increased job control (operationalized as Karasek’s job decision latitude) mediated the relation between a work reorganization intervention and significantly improved stress-related outcomes (mental health, sickness absence rates, and self-rated performance). Participation has not been widely included in the study of CWB, but should be explicitly included in future research on the role of organizational culture and climate in workplace aggression and CWB. It is particularly important to investigate how participation in general might affect the overall climate of an organization in a way that might reduce the likelihood of CWB.

Empowerment A concept related to participation, empowerment has been studied as a predictor of job strain (Spreitzer, Kizilos, & Nason, 1997). Spreitzer et al. studied four dimensions of empowerment, using Thomas and Velthouse’s (1990) conceptualization of psychological empowerment. This conceptualization views worker empowerment as an intrinsic motivational process, based on employees’ interpretive styles and global beliefs, and uses four cognitions (sense of impact, competence, meaningfulness, and choice or selfdetermination) as the basis for empowerment. Competence is similar to selfefficacy and choice is similar to autonomy. Of these four dimensions, Spreitzer et al. found only competence to be related to lower job strain. Competence and impact were related to perceived work effectiveness, and meaningfulness and self-determination were related to work satisfaction. This study provides a strong argument for a finer-grained definition of control, and the need to more closely match the particular kind of control with the specific stressors and stress outcomes being considered. This approach would be useful in studying the wide range of CWB. In contrast, an interesting warning about the potential boomerang effects of empowerment interventions is presented by Paul, Niehoff, and Turnley (2000). Interventions designed to increase employee involvement in organizational decision-making (e.g., quality circles, self-managing work teams, and gain sharing) are likely to snowball, in that employees come to expect even greater empowerment. This becomes the new psychological contract.

194

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

When the empowerment process slows down, or indeed ends, employees are likely to experience a violation of the psychological contract, leading to feelings of betrayal and injustice (Rousseau, 1989), frustration, and CWB. This suggests another useful approach to studying CWB: the effects of the interplay of new management interventions promising increased control, rising expectations, and employee disappointment.

Workplace Change Organizations, by their nature, evolve and change over time, requiring adaptation by employees. Although not specifically a control variable, organizational change is closely linked to control in that change threatens the status quo and may threaten perceptions of control by employees. Furthermore, it can change both social relationships and tasks that have implications for individuals, in some cases limiting employee latitude over how jobs are done as change is required, and in other cases increasing latitude as times of change produce opportunities to exert control. During times of change, employees might be free to work out new ways of working as they adjust to new organizational practices and structures. Baron and Neuman (1998), leading researchers in workplace aggression, found that a number of dimensions of change (e.g., organizational change, social change, cost-cutting, and job insecurity) predicted greater incidence of CWB, particularly verbal aggression and obstructionism. Arguably, employees can perceive these types of changes as threats, particularly when paired with perceptions of powerlessness. Additional research is needed to ascertain under which conditions change might and might not lead to increased CWB.

Self-Determination Another approach to the study of CWB considers aggressive, abusive, or uncivil work behavior, commonly known as bullying, with a focus on the targets rather than the perpetrators (Fox & Spector, 2005). A very few studies have looked at the role of personal or situational control in the relationships between perpetrators, targets, and organizational context of bullying. Aquino, Grover, Bradfield, and Allen (1999), for example, looked at self-determination as a personal antecedent of victimization. They defined self-determination as the perception or experience of choice or an internal locus of causality, although their operationalization of the construct is almost identical to measures of job autonomy. They proposed that individuals

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

195

who experience higher self-determination are more likely to control their environments, be more assertive in dealing with potential bullies, and thus be less likely to be victimized. Their study showed that higher self-determination predicted less likelihood of being victims of either indirect harm (‘‘did something to make you look bad’’, p. 265) or direct aggression (‘‘cursed at you’’, p. 265). These findings are consistent with Grandey et al. (2004) who showed that autonomy related negatively to being the target of verbal aggression. However, once again, Aquino et al. (1999) were unable to provide support for the theorized interactive role of self-determination, in their case the interaction of employee status and self-determination in predicting victimization.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS There is limited research exploring the role of control in its various forms with CWB. In fact of all the control-related constructs, most have little or no research on them, autonomy and locus of control being the exceptions. Furthermore, there are at times conflicting findings and failures to support theoretical hypotheses, most notably with interaction effects. We feel that at least part of the problem is that the global nature of the control variables studied may not match well the underlying process by which it contributes to CWB. In order to explain the mixed empirical support for the role of control in CWB, we looked at another classic theory, Ajzen and Fishbein’s (1977) Theory of Reasoned Action. Here again, a belief in one’s capacity to control one’s own behavior and the environment plays a central role. In decades of testing, Ajzen and Fishbein discovered that the theory informs behavior only at a consistent level of specificity – that is, a very general, abstract control belief is not on the same level of specificity as a particular behavior, and would not be expected to strongly influence that behavior. We propose that this is the key challenge facing researchers attempting to demonstrate the predicted linkages among work stressors, control, emotions, and behaviors. It is not control in general, but control over the specific perceived stressor in a given situation, that comprises the appraisal of one’s ability to cope with the challenge from the work environment, and in turn, is likely to trigger a specific emotion relative to that challenge. It may not even suffice to link categories of stressors (e.g., constraints) to types of control constructs (e.g., self-efficacy). These may be too broad because it is the context of a specific situation that matters. An individual may believe he or

196

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

she is very capable of performing a task under reasonable conditions, but constraints might produce an unreasonable situation. For example, a salesclerk cannot sell products to nonexistent customers. In this case the relevant control over the constraint of insufficient customers is control over things that will bring people into the store, such as marketing strategies. Similarly, the emotions research community (see the ongoing discussions on EMONET, an email list and website located at http://www.business.uq.edu.au/ research/emonet/index.htm) is actively developing methodologies to uncover discrete emotional responses to discrete workplace events. The nomonological net surrounding anger, for example, cannot be identical to those surrounding boredom or anxiety, and anger itself may comprise a complexity of experience that is ignored by all but a few researchers (see Spielberger, Krasner, & Solomon, 1988, for an exception). Finally, robust, psychometrically sound classifications of CWB evade us. No matter how finely grained the typology, individual items within a category (for example, absence, classified as withdrawal behavior) may be multiply determined and unrelated to other items within that category (for example, returning late from lunch). Perhaps there is no alternative to analysis at the very basic item level, associating a specific stressor with an appropriate form and level of control, a specific emotion, and a specific behavioral item. In assessing CWB, we are not developing measures based on effect indicators (Bollen & Lennox, 1991), that is, we are not proposing parallel indicators caused by a single underlying construct, but rather checklists of independent behaviors that may or may not allow reasonable clustering into categories such as abuse directed toward coworkers, withdrawal, or work sabotage (Spector et al., in press). Further challenges are inherent in the complexity of peoples’ emotions, attributions, interpretations, beliefs, and behaviors, particularly in the volatile environment of work. Individual differences emerge that are far more complex and potent than can be tapped with the current measures available to our organization studies community. A few examples of untapped variables include individual differences in preferences or tendencies to favor emotional/reactive versus planned behaviors; effects of single incidents or acute stressors versus ‘‘camel’s back’’ effects of chronic, long-term stressors; effects of external factors such as state of the economy or labor market, career and family considerations on individuals’ states of emotional tension as well as risk-taking proclivities. Therefore, we propose that a different research methodology, richer, more immediate, and more specific, is required. We suggest a research paradigm including detailed interviews, critical incidents, diaries, and experience/event

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

197

sampling would bring us closer to the requisite specificity. This would allow for an investigation of the processes involved in specific instances of behavior rather than attempting to find general correlates of broad classes of different behaviors that may obscure as much as illuminate. We suggest that, with the necessary correspondence of levels of specificity, we may more fruitfully seek to understand the dynamic interplay of stress, perception, appraisal, emotion, control, and behavior that can truly assist work organizations and their members in coming to grips with CWB.

REFERENCES Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude–behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84(5), 888–918. Allen, V. L., & Greenberger, D. B. (1980). Destruction and perceived control. In: A. Baum & J. E. Singer (Eds), Applications of personal control. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Anderson, C. R. (1977). Locus of control, coping behaviors, and performance in a stress setting: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 446–451. Aquino, K., Grover, S. L., Bradfield, M., & Allen, D. G. (1999). The effects of negative affectivity, hierarchical status, and self-determination on workplace victimization. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 260–272. Averill, J. (1973). Personal control over aversive stimuli and its relationship to stress. Psychological Bulletin, 80, 286–303. Bacharach, S., Bamberger, P., Conley, S., & Bauer, S. (1990). The dimensionality of decision participation in educational organizations: The value of a multi-domain evaluation. Educational Administration Quarterly, 26, 126–167. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Barker, J. R. (1993). Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 408–437. Baron, R. A., & Neuman, J. H. (1998). Workplace aggression – the iceberg beneath the tip of workplace violence: Evidence of its forms, frequency, and targets. Public Administration Quarterly, 21, 446–464. Bies, R. J., Tripp, T. M., & Kramer, R. M. (1997). At the breaking point: Cognitive and social dynamics of revenge in organizations. In: R. A. Giacalone & J. Greenberg (Eds), Antisocial behavior in organizations (pp. 18–36). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 305–314. Breaugh, J. A. (1985). The measurement of work autonomy. Human Relations, 38, 551–570. Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2002). Organizational behavior: Affect in the workplace. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 279–307. Bruursema, K., & Spector, P. E. (2005). Leadership style and the link with counterproductive work behavior (CWB). Paper presented at the meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Los Angeles, April 15–17. Bunce, D. (2001). Job control mediates change in a work reorganization intervention for stress reduction. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 290–302.

198

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

de Jonge, J., & Kompier, M. A. J. (1997). A critical examination of the Demand–Control– Support model from a work psychological perspective. International Journal of Stress Management, 4, 235–258. Dollard, J., Doob, L. W., Miller, N. E., Mowrer, O. H., & Sears, R. R. (1939). Frustration and aggression. New Haven: Yale University Press. Dwyer, D. J., & Ganster, D. C. (1991). The effects of job demands and control on employee attendance and satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12, 595–608. Fessler, D. M. T. (2004). Shame in two cultures: Implications for evolutionary approaches. Journal of Cognition & Culture, 4, 207–262. Fortunato, V. J., Jex, S. M., & Heinish, D. A. (1999). An examination of the discriminant validity of the Strain-Free Negative Affectivity scale. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 503–522. Foucault, M. (1976). Discipline and punish. New York: Vintage. Fox, S., & Spector, P. E. (1999). A model of work frustration-aggression. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 915–931. Fox, S., & Spector, P. E. (2005). Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets. Washington, DC: APA Press. Fox, S., Spector, P. E., & Miles, D. (2001). Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) in response to job stressors and organizational justice: Some mediator and moderator tests for autonomy and emotions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 291–309. Ganster, D. C. (1988). Improving measures of worker control in occupational stress research. In: J. J. Hurrell, L. R. Murphy, S. L. Sauter & C. L. Cooper (Eds), Occupational stress: Issues and developments in research (pp. 88–98). New York: Taylor & Francis. Ganster, D. C., & Fusilier, M. R. (1989). Control in the workplace. In: C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds), International review of industrial and organizational psychology 1989 (pp. 235–280). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Grandey, A. A., Dickter, D. N., & Sin, H. P. (2004). The customer is not, always right: Customer aggression and emotion regulation of service employees. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 397–418. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159–170. Heacox, N. J. (1996). The relationship between organizational frustration and aggressive behaviors in the workplace. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, California School of Professional Psychology, San Diego. Jex, S. M., & Bliese, P. D. (1999). Efficacy beliefs as a moderator of the impact of work-related stressors: A multilevel study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 349–361. Jex, S. M., Bliese, P. D., Buzzell, S., & Primeau (2001). The impact of self-efficacy on stressor– strain relations: Coping style as an explanatory mechanism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 401–409. Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Pucik, V., & Welbourne, T. M. (1999). Managerial coping with organizational change: A dispositional perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 107–122. Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285–308. Karasek, R. A., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work: Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. New York: Basic Books.

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

199

Kobasa, S. C. (1979). Stressful life events, personality, and health: An inquiry into hardiness. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 37, 1–11. Langfred, C. W. (2000). The paradox of self-management: Individual and group autonomy in work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 563–585. Lazarus, R. S. (1982). Thoughts on the relations between emotion and cognition. American Psychologist, 37, 1019–1024. Lazarus, R. S. (1995). Psychological stress in the workplace. In: R. Crandall & P. L. Perrewe´ (Eds), Occupational stress (pp. 3–14). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. New York: Springer. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer. Lodge, M., & Taber, C. (2000). Three steps toward a theory of motivated political reasoning. In: A. Lupia, M. McCubbins & S. Popkin (Eds), Elements of political reason: Understanding and expanding the limits of rationality. London: Cambridge University Press. Mandler, G. (1975). Mind and emotion. New York: Wiley. Mikkelsen, A., & Gundersen, M. (2003). The effect of a participatory organizational intervention on work environment, job stress, and subjective health complaints. International Journal of Stress Management, 10, 91–110. Miller, S. M. (1979). Controllability and human stress: Method, evidence and theory. Behavior Research and Therapy, 17, 287–304. Mustaine, E. E., & Tewksbury, R. (2002). Workplace theft: An analysis of student-employee offenders and job attributes. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 27, 111–127. Paul, R. J., Niehoff, B. P., & Turnley, W. H. (2000). Empowerment, expectations, and the psychological contract – managing the dilemmas and gaining the advantages. Journal of Socio-Economics, 29, 471–484. Perlow, R., & Latham, L. L. (1993). Relationship of client abuse with locus of control and gender: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 831–834. Perrewe´, P. L., & Zellars, K. L. (1999). An examination of attributions and emotions in the transactional approach to the organizational stress process. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 739–752. Peters, L. H., & O’Connor, E. J. (1980). Situational constraints and work outcomes: The influences of a frequently overlooked construct. Academy of Management Review, 5, 391–397. Phares, E. J. (1976). Locus of control in personality. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press. Plutchik, R. (1980). Emotion, a psychoevolutionary synthesis. New York: Harper & Row. Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 555–572. Rothbaum, F., Weisz, J. R., & Snyder, S. S. (1982). Changing the world and changing the self: A two-process model of perceived control. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 42, 5–37. Rousseau, D. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2, 121–139. Schachter, S., & Singer, J. (1962). Cognitive, social, and physiological determinants of emotional state. Psychological Review, 63, 379–399. Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Helplessness: On depression, development, and death. San Francisco: Freeman. Simon, H. (1967). Motivational and emotional controls of cognition. Psychological Review, 74, 29–39.

200

SUZY FOX AND PAUL E. SPECTOR

Smith, C. S., Tisak, J., Hahn, S. E., & Schmieder, R. A. (1997). The measurement of job control. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 225–237. Spector, P. E. (1986). Perceived control by employees: A meta-analysis of studies concerning autonomy and participation at work. Human Relations, 39, 1005–1016. Spector, P. E. (1988). Development of the work locus of control scale. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 61, 335–340. Spector, P. E. (1998). A control theory of the job stress process. In: C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of organizational stress (pp. 153–169). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Spector, P. E., Dwyer, D. J., & Jex, S. M. (1988). The relationship of job stressors to affective, health, and performance outcomes: A comparison of multiple data sources. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 11–19. Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2002). An emotion-centered model of voluntary work behavior: Some parallels between counterproductive work behavior (CWB) and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Human Resource Management Review, 12(2), 269–292. Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2003). Reducing subjectivity in the assessment of the job environment: Development of the factual autonomy scale, FAS. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 1–16. Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2005). The Stressor-Emotion Model of Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB). In: S. Fox & P. E. Spector (Eds), Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets. Washington, DC: APA Press. Spector, P. E., & O’Connell, B. J. (1994). The contribution of individual dispositions to the subsequent perceptions of job stressors and job strains. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67, 1–11. Spector, P. E., Fox, S., Penney, L. M., Bruursema, K., Goh, A., & Kessler, S. (in press).The dimensionality of counterproductivity: Are all Counterproductive behaviors created equal? Journal of Vocational Behavior. Spector, P. E., Sanchez, J. I., Siu, O. L., Salgado, J., & Ma, J. (2004). Eastern versus western control beliefs at work: An investigation of secondary control, socioinstrumental control and work locus of control in China and the U.S.. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53, 38–60. Spielberger, C. D., Krasner, S. S., & Solomon, E. P. (1988). The experience, expression, and control of anger. In: M. P. Janisse (Ed.), Health psychology: Individual differences and stress. New York: Springer-Verlag. Spielberger, C. D., & Sydeman, S. J. (1994). State-trait anxiety inventory and state-trait anger expression inventory. In: M. E. Maruish (Ed.), The use of psychological tests for treatment planning and outcome assessment. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA. Spreitzer, G. M., Kizilos, M. A., & Nason, S. W. (1997). A dimensional analysis of the relationship between psychological empowerment and effectiveness, satisfaction, and strain. Journal of Management, 23, 679–704. Storms, P. L., & Spector, P. E. (1987). Relationships of organizational frustration with reported behavioral reactions: The moderating effect of perceived control. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 60, 227–234. Terry, D. J., & Jimmieson, N. L. (1999). Work control and employee well-being: A decade review. In: C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds), International review of industrial and organizational psychology 1989 (pp. 95–148). Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Control in a Stressor-Emotion Theory of CWB

201

Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An ‘‘interpretive’’ model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15, 666–681. Thompson, S. C. (1981). Will it hurt less if I can control it? A complex answer to a simple question. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 89–101. Van Katwyk, P. T., Fox, S., Spector, P. E., & Kelloway, E. K. (2000). Using the job-related affective well-being scale (JAWS) to investigate affective responses to work stressors. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 219–230. Van Yperen, N. W., & Hagedoorn, M. (2003). Do high job demands increase intrinsic motivation or fatigue or both? The role of job control and job social support. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 339–348. Vardi, Y., & Weitz, E. (2003). Personal and positional antecedents of organizational misbehaviour. In: A. Sagie, S. Stashevsky & M. Koslowsky (Eds), Misbehaviour and dysfunctional attitudes in organizations (pp. 173–193). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Wall, T., & Jackson, P. R. (1996). The demands-control model of job strain: A more specific test. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 69, 153–166. Weiss, H. M., Nicholas, J. P., & Daus, C. S. (1999). An examination of the joint effects of affective experiences and job beliefs on job satisfaction and variations in affective experiences over time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78, 1–24. Wiedenfeld, S. A., O’Leary, A., Bandura, A., & Brown, S. (1990). Impact of perceived self-efficacy in coping with stressors on components of the immune system. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 59, 1082–1094.

This page intentionally left blank

202

THE ASSUMED LINEARITY OF ORGANIZATIONAL PHENOMENA: IMPLICATIONS FOR OCCUPATIONAL STRESS AND WELL-BEING Gerald R. Ferris, Michael G. Bowen, Darren C. Treadway, Wayne A. Hochwarter, Angela T. Hall and Pamela L. Perrewe´ ABSTRACT Theory and method are inherently intertwined in the creation and maintenance of most areas of scientific inquiry. The organizational sciences, in general, and the occupational stress area, in particular, are no exceptions. In this paper, we argue that an implicit supposition of linear independent– dependent variable forms has driven both theory and method, and as such, presents a characterization of organizational science and stress scholarship that is incomplete at best. We also review stress literature that has acknowledged the potential for nonlinear stressor–strain associations and offer empirical examples of both restricted and non-restricted nonlinearity.

Employee Health, Coping and Methodologies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 5, 203–232 Copyright r 2006 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(05)05006-7

203

204

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

We conclude by offering prescriptions for scholars conducting research that extends beyond the examination of linear forms exclusively.

INTRODUCTION For every complex problem there is a simple solution that is wrong – George Bernard Shaw Everything is simpler than you think and at the same time more complex than you imagine – Johan Wolfgang von Goethe

Scientists have the responsibility for actively promoting theory and research, and developing a more informed understanding of organizational phenomena. Implicit in this responsibility is that balanced attention be given to both the magnitude and form of relationships, which emphasizes both theory and method. Periodically, it is appropriate to assess advancement in terms of achieving these objectives. This is particularly important to the area of occupational stress and well-being, in light of its history and prospects for the future. The message we wish to convey is that the current status of stress research reflects a preoccupation with the assumption of linearity, and that this inherent bias has had a considerable influence on shaping the knowledge base in this area of inquiry. We do not argue, or even imply, that the preoccupation with linearity is a function of active, conscious efforts to perpetuate this line of thought. Indeed, it is probably reflective of less conscious activity, involving both how we formulate and test theory, for example, through early training in doctoral programs. We examine these issues and suggest reasons for expanding our theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches to build a more representative body of work, and not a limited, unduly narrow, and potentially distorted characterization of organizational stress research. The suggestion that the field is building a science of stress that is disproportionately linear begs the question: ‘‘How do you know that to be true?’’ One can legitimately raise the issue that the representation of linear and nonlinear research that currently exists is an accurate reflection of the true universe of all research. A definitive resolution of this issue would require knowing the unknowable, which, unfortunately, is not possible. However, in the following sections of this paper, we attempt to demonstrate why nonlinear characterizations of stress phenomena in theory and research might be underrepresented.

Assumed Linearity

205

THEORY AND RESEARCH IN THE ORGANIZATIONAL SCIENCES In this section, we examine how theory development and data analytic strategies have conspired to create this linear science of organizations. Although we present this information as applicable to all areas of organizational science scholarship, we particularly focus on the area of occupational stress and well-being. Theory Development Theory development is critical for the expansion of organizational science research. It is the basis upon which new ideas are tested and knowledge gained. Within the organizational literature alone, articles abound on the necessity for good theory building (e.g., Elsbach, Sutton, & Whetten, 1999; Weick, 1989; Whetten, 1989) because theory provides the roadmap to study phenomena in organizations. Theory development is both art and science, and as such, the craft of theory is often difficult to master (Daft, 1983, 1995). However, scholars have provided suggestions regarding what constitutes (good) theory and what theory is not (e.g., Bacharach, 1989; Sutton & Staw, 1995). It has been suggested that theory should be falsifiable (i.e., subject to being refuted), have utility, and answer the questions of ‘‘what,’’ ‘‘how,’’ and ‘‘why’’ (Bacharach, 1989; Whetten, 1989). Further, the purpose of theoretical statements is to organize ideas succinctly and communicate these ideas clearly. It has been argued that theories should strive for generalizability, accuracy, and simplicity (i.e., parsimony) (Weick, 1999). However, Weick recognized that achieving these three elements simultaneously would be unrealistic. Although theory should be illustrative, simple descriptions and/ or categorizations (e.g., data, typologies, or metaphor) in themselves do not constitute theory (Bacharach, 1989). Decades ago, many organizations followed a top-down, centralized bureaucratic structure. Following this form, researchers emphasized theory that concentrated on rational decision-making models, which have tended to assume linear modeling. In recent times, we have seen a trend toward flatter organizations with more decentralized decision-making (Cascio, 1995). Yet, the body of organizational research has not adapted its theories to reflect contemporary organizational realities (Daft & Lewin, 1993), which represent a more accurate depiction of assumed complexity.

206

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

Furthermore, it has been noted that researchers too often research what they know, what is easy or convenient to study, and what is rewarded (Podaskoff & Dalton, 1987). Leavitt (1996) argued that young scholars conduct research today less for the pursuit of challenge, interest, and excitement, and more for purposes of conformity, and approval from the field as to what is considered appropriate and rewarded. Collectively, this could be construed as creating an excessively restrained and unimaginative scholarly environment. Thorngate (1976, p. 135) noted ‘‘ypragmatics of research set severe limits on the complexity of theories that can be subjected to empirical test.’’ It is apparent that many scholars have adopted this philosophy. Over 30 years ago, Davis (1971) implored scholars to be innovative. However, too much novelty and/or ideas ahead of their time may not be accepted by ‘‘gatekeepers’’ in the field, such as reviewers and journal editors, who believe they are operating in the best interests of the field by taking an intellectually conservative approach (see also, Bedeian, 2004). Researchers (DiMaggio, 1995; McKinley, Mone, & Moon, 1999) have suggested that scholars strike a delicate balance between novelty and familiarity in theory building if they hope for favorable evaluations and acceptance of their efforts. DiMaggio (1995, p. 394) stated: ‘‘The reception of a theory is shaped by the extent to which a theory resonates with the cultural presuppositions of the time and of the scientific audience that consumes it.’’ How and why have we gotten to this point? Sutton and Staw (1995) suggested that we might not see good theory development because we do not spend adequate time in doctoral programs teaching these skills. Lundberg (1976) viewed this as the disproportionate emphasis in research training on hypothesis testing rather than hypothesis creation. These are points well taken, and we would further suggest that if theory development is at least somewhat self-taught, the role models tend to be conventional approaches that have been used and rewarded in the past, and nonlinear thinking typically does not constitute conventionality.

Theory Testing and Data Analytic Strategies In his discussion of the gap between sociological theory and testing, Abbott (1988) argued that a primary cause of this division is the development of a ‘‘general linear reality.’’ He argued that the assumptions of this reality may lead academics to reject empirical sociology. Despite the grounding of some management scholarship in sociological theory, the field of management has had much the opposite occur because there has been no rejection of linear

Assumed Linearity

207

empiricism. To this point, Guion (1998) argued ‘‘[w]hat is needed is an expansion of the options and perspectives of modeling by inviting the development of testing of nonlinear models as well’’ (p. 362). In agreement with Guion, we take a closer look at how and why we might have gotten to this point in the current status of the field, and provide a brief summary of the methodological treatments of nonlinear processes and effects in the organizational sciences. Perhaps it is the case that linear models have dominated data analytic methods because they are so robust. However, such models are sensitive to the detection of only linear, not nonlinear, effects. We contend that nonlinear relationships are as reasonable and legitimate as linear associations, depending upon the particular phenomena under investigation, the context within which they are being studied, and the theoretical justification provided by the researcher. However, there are a number of factors that have led to the neglect of nonlinear issues, and several are inherent in the manner in which traditional data analytic strategies are developed. In examining these issues, we hope to accomplish two objectives. We provide a brief description of data analytic techniques and discuss how they refine or complicate nonlinear testing. Furthermore, we argue that researchers’ failure to conceptualize and routinely test for nonlinear effects hinders the generalizability of results, and thus increases the potential for inaccurate characterization of organizational phenomena. Know Your Data Cohen (1994) argued that scientists too quickly rush to make generalizations before they even fully understand their data. Fields (1984) suggested that much could be learned from data before we apply sophisticated statistical manipulations. Specifically, Fields argued that whisker plots and scatter plots offer researchers an opportunity to strengthen their linear hypotheses by demonstrating that their significant bivariate correlations are not hiding true nonlinear forms. Interestingly, although researchers have progressed from keypunch cards to on-line surveys, we have not progressed as ambitiously toward remedying many of Fields’s (1984) concerns outlined over two decades ago. Too often, researchers do not demonstrate that they have even considered whether their data meets the assumptions of linear analysis, much less conducted an in-depth exploration of the properties of the data. A review of the last three years of articles published in the Academy of Management Journal, Administrative Science Quarterly, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Journal of Management showed that less than three percent of the studies

208

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

acknowledged the properties of their data (i.e., an explicit assertion that an exploratory examination demonstrated that the data met the assumptions of the analytic technique). Interactions Masking Nonlinearity Within multiplicative regression models, the integration of theory and method is paramount to the interpretation and generalization of results because of the inherent weakened reliability of cross-product or squared terms (Cohen & Cohen, 1983). As such, the generalizability of a study’s results may depend solely on the fit between the theory used to develop hypotheses and the data analytic strategies employed to test those hypotheses. Whereas interaction studies are abundant in the literature, it is apparent that few of these studies have followed any of the guidelines outlined below for controlling, or, at the very least, considering nonlinear effects. Methodologists have demonstrated that interactions can mask stronger nonlinear effects. At least three strategies have been put forth to deal with this issue. First, the effect size comparison approach (Lubinski & Humphreys, 1990) proposed that all potential quadratic and interactive variations be entered into the regression equation using a step-wise procedure. The stepwise procedure will select the appropriate form by entering the variable into the equation that accounts for the greatest change in R2 over the additive model. A second, and perhaps more theoretically driven approach, suggests that researchers should routinely control for nonlinear terms in moderated hierarchical multiple regression analyzes (i.e., entering nonlinear independent variable terms prior to the cross-product term, Cortina, 1993). In doing so, the researchers can demonstrate that the effects are derived from the crossproduct terms, and are not stealing their form from nonlinear effects of the predictor variables. Further, it is plausible that the inclusion of nonlinear main effect variables can cause once significant cross-product terms to become nonsignificant in the following step. Further, Ganzach (1997) noted that a failure to include nonlinear predictors prior to the addition of the cross-product term may lead to erroneous results. Specifically, he demonstrated that a synergistic result (e.g., the association between X and Y variables become more positive as Z increases) may occur, when in fact, an offset relationship (e.g., the association between X and Y variables become more positive as Z decreases) exists, and vice versa. As such, a failure to simultaneously examine product and nonlinear terms may result in inaccurate nonsignificant results. Finally, MacCallum and Mar (1995) indicated that testing the difference between the multiple

Assumed Linearity

209

correlations of an additive and multiplicative model can strengthen the effect size approach. They argued that this approach overcomes problems related to multicollinearity within the components of the interaction term. Summarizing these approaches, Valentine (1999) suggested that the limitations of linear research can be overcome ‘‘by using a combinatory strategy whereby both linear and nonlinear methods are coupled to assess variable relationships’’ (p. 1040). Despite the prevalence of studies involving interactions (roughly 36% of all articles published in Academy of Management Journal, Administrative Science Quarterly, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Journal of Management in the last three years), less than five percent of these studies tested for nonlinear effects in any manner (i.e., 10/ 238, 4.2%). Thus, it appears researchers largely have ignored the advice of methodologists regarding the nature of nonlinear relationships. Costs to the Field Kaplan’s (1964) ‘‘law of the instrument’’ may have helped contribute to the state of affairs we see today. That is: ‘‘Give a small boy a hammer, and he will find that everything he encounters needs pounding. It comes as no particular surprise to discover that a scientist formulates problems in a way which requires for their solution just those techniques in which he himself is especially skilled’’ (Kaplan, 1964, p. 28). Indeed, all scholars have been privy to conversations where the discussion centered on a particular researcher’s overreliance of one method to the point of ignoring all others (e.g., ‘‘I’m a LISREL person’’). Whereas these asides help define contributions, an analysis of the literature suggests that many scholars are guilty of hammering the organizational nail with only linear methodology, ignoring previous scholars who cautioned researchers about being driven by their mastery of a particular skill or approach (Kaplan, 1964). Rosenthal (1979, p. 86) noted, ‘‘file drawers back at the lab [that] are filled with 95% of the studies that show nonsignificant results.’’ This phenomenon leads researchers to form conclusions only on the basis of studies that produce statistically significant results (i.e., typically linear results), but overlooks all the studies that were never published because they did not test for, and thus failed to detect, significant nonlinear effects. We argue that many of these nonsignificant linear representations may provide important information regarding the nonlinearity of organizational phenomenon. Thus, the quality of theory in the organizational sciences may benefit from a nonlinear reanalysis of studies relegated to ‘‘file drawer’’ status.

210

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

PROGRESS ON NONLINEARITY IN THE ORGANIZATIONAL SCIENCES Up to this point, we have made the argument that the literature is characterized by disproportionately less nonlinear theory and research. Furthermore, we suggested that this state is an unintentional consequence of the way students are trained to build theory and analyze data, and the influences and reinforcements in the field. Although there is disproportionately less nonlinear work, the field is not devoid of scholarly activity in this area. As such, we wish to representatively reflect areas of conceptual development and empirical research published to date that have productively considered nonlinear relationships. In so doing, we divide this section into separate sub-sections. We acknowledge that there are select incidents where the sub-sections overlap and the distinctions become blurred. We see the treatment of nonlinear dynamics in organizational theory and research as consisting of areas where nonlinearity is consistent or invariant across settings, conditions, samples, and so forth; that is, where nonlinearity is absolute. We refer to this as ‘‘Unrestricted Nonlinearity.’’ Alternatively, there are conditions where nonlinearity is not invariant across settings, but rather is restricted to certain situations or individual difference variations. We refer to this as ‘‘Restricted Nonlinearity.’’ This typology consists of largely independent categories. However, there are instances where, for example, a theory was developed that assumed unrestricted nonlinearity, but tests ultimately established restricted nonlinearity (e.g., Jackofsky’s, 1984 model of the turnover–job performance relationship). Following this discussion, we identify the importance of sound theoretical justification for nonlinear associations, and describe work that has been impeded due to inadequate conceptual interpretation, as well as one particular area of promise for future development. Unrestricted Nonlinearity As noted, unrestricted nonlinearity reflects instances where a construct demonstrates a curvilinear association (X 2 ¼ Y ) with a dependent variable irrespective of contextual or individual difference factors. As an example, a number of investigations have demonstrated a U-shaped relationship between age and job satisfaction (Clarke, Oswald, & Warr, 1997; Hochwarter, Ferris, Perrewe´, Witt, & Kiewitz, 2001b; Kacmar & Ferris, 1989), such that

Assumed Linearity

211

satisfaction is highest when age is either high or low. Furthermore, Champoux (1980) demonstrated that an inverted-U form best depicted the job scope–employee reaction (e.g., satisfaction, motivation) relationship, such that moderate levels of job characteristics were viewed most favorably. Warr (1987) proposed his ‘‘Vitamin Model,’’ which predicts a curvilinear relationship between job complexity and employee well-being, paralleling the ways vitamins act on the human body. Also, de Jonge and Schaufeli (1998) found that nonlinear (i.e., U shaped and inverted-U shaped) models predicted the relationship between job characteristics and employee wellbeing better than linear models. Moreover, research (de Jonge, Rueves, Houtman, Bongers, & Kompier, 2000) has shown job demands–emotional exhaustion, social support–emotional exhaustion, and social support– depression relationships to be best represented by nonlinear terms (e.g., U-shaped). Finally, a recent study revealed that worker accidents were highest when construction projects were at their midpoint, thus reflecting an inverted-U shaped form (Humphrey, Moon, Conlon, & Hoffman, 2004). Additionally, extensive research has shed light on the form of the job performance–turnover relationship (Hochwarter et al., 2001a; Jackofsky, 1984; Jackofsky, Ferris, & Breckenridge, 1986; Keller, 1984; Martin, Price, & Mueller, 1981). In general, this research supports a curvilinear association (e.g., turnover more prevalent at high and low levels of performance). For example, research has shown a U-shaped form to surface when performance predicted both intent (Mossholder, Bedeian, Norris, Giles, & Feild, 1988) and actual turnover (Jackofsky et al., 1986). Finally, a meta-analytic study conducted by Williams and Livingstone (1994), consisting of 15,138 respondents across 55 studies, reported a nonlinear performance–voluntary turnover relationship. Robertson (1994) suggested researchers should investigate the nonlinear effects of personality characteristics, and, within this broad area, a more thorough assessment of nonlinear forms in the personality–performance domain (Caligiuri & Day, 2000; Schneider & Hough, 1995). Specifically, it has been suggested that a deficiency or an overabundance of certain personality dimensions may be associated with unfavorable outcomes. For example, too much agreeableness has been shown to be counterproductive to effective functioning in some settings (Graziano, Jensen-Campbell, & Hair, 1996). Tett (1998) acknowledged that conscientious individuals might have difficulty completing multiple tasks characterized by stringent time constraints. Further, it is plausible that individuals with too much or too little extraversion may not do well at work, especially in jobs that reflect social

212

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

isolation. In support, Waldman, Atwater, and Davidson (2004) reported that moderately extraverted groups outperformed high or low level subgroups.

Restricted Nonlinearity An additional level of precision is attained when nonlinear associations are established in the presence of supplemental situational or individual difference factors (i.e., X 2
Y ¼ Z); that is, nonlinear effects are restricted to specific levels of particular boundary conditions. Consequently, it may be premature to suggest that nonlinear relationships exist for all research participants without developing a more expansive view that accurately reflects organizational reality. For example, Xie and Johns (1995) indicated that demands-ability fit moderated the U-shaped job scope–stress relationship. Gardner and Cummings (1988) suggested that the curvilinear (i.e., inverted-U) job demands–performance relationship was more likely to surface for those with complex jobs due to the necessary role requirements and subsequent high information-processing obligations. Specifically, those with high-scope jobs concurrently experiencing demands-ability fit reported less exhaustion and anxiety than those perceiving a misfit. Other restricted nonlinear relationships can be found in the literature. For example, Hochwarter et al. (2001a) reported that the performance–turnover relationship reflected a U-shaped form. However, once the data were partitioned into gender subgroups, males continued to display the U-shaped relationship whereas females reflected no job performance–turnover relationship. Furthermore, Trevor, Gerhart, and Boudreau (1997) supported Jackofsky’s (1984) predicted curvilinear performance–turnover relationship. However, low salary growth and high promotions created an association that was more prominent, thus magnifying the nonlinear effects under restricted conditions. Additionally, research has demonstrated age and tenure nonlinear (i.e., inverted-U shape) associations with performance only for clerical employees with largely uncomplicated tasks (Avolio, Waldman, & McDaniel, 1990). Moreover, Wright and Bonett’s (2002) meta-analysis revealed that employee tenure had a significant nonlinear moderating effect on the commitment– performance relationship. Two studies within the context of stressor–strain research provide examples of restricted nonlinearity. Hochwarter and Witt (2004) hypothesized that

Assumed Linearity

213

the nonlinear perceived organizational support (POS) – job performance relationship would be moderated by organizational cynicism. Results, across three samples, demonstrated consistent support such that an inverted-U form best represented the POS–performance association for respondents high in cynicism. Further, Hochwarter and Byrne (2005) found that affective disposition (i.e., negative and positive affect) moderated the nonlinear leader member exchange (LMX) – job tension relationship. Specifically, job tension was most intense for low PAs when LMX was either low or high (e.g., a U-shaped form). In addition to augmenting these streams of research, there are many opportunities to expand the existing body of literature by investigating boundary conditions that might influence nonlinear relationships. For example, we advocate following the lead of Janssen (2001) who found that fairness moderated the inverted-U shaped relationship between job demands and responses. Examining contextual cues and dispositional factors as moderators of nonlinear relationships offers researchers the opportunity to reconcile conflicting findings in previous research. For example, inconsistent findings regarding the time management–performance relationship have been reported with some studies demonstrating positive effects (Barling, Kelloway, & Cheung, 1996; Lim, 1993), whereas others challenge the veracity of this finding (Macan, 1994). We contend that an inverted-U form may exist between these variables such that very low (i.e., inactivity) and very high (i.e., over planning leading to paralysis) levels of time management may be associated with low performance. Furthermore, it is possible that this association is more pronounced in high job demand environments because this setting probably amplifies the debilitating effects of being both under- and over-prepared.

Empirical Examples of Restricted and Nonrestricted Linearity In this section, we illustrate examples where restricted and nonrestricted nonlinear effects have occurred. The first example involves the prediction that participation in upward influence can be taxing, especially at high levels. Rationality, which requires the use of information and logical arguments to get one’s way (Kipnis, Schmidt, & Wilkinson, 1980), may be more strongly associated with tension when high and low levels are utilized. At low levels, individuals may feel that they are not utilizing the most appropriate tactic to secure favorable outcomes, or may find that the resources needed to be persuasive are not available.

214

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

Alternatively, spending an inordinate amount of time providing rational tactics may be equally taxing. The effort needed to develop arguments that support one’s views presumably is labor intensive. From a practical perspective, utilizing extreme levels of rational tactics may feel like one is ‘‘beating one’s head against the wall.’’ Data were collected from 744 nonteaching university employees. After controlling for age, gender, tenure, affective disposition, and the linear rationality term, the nonlinear rationality term explained significant incremental job tension variance. The form of this relationship is shown in Fig. 1. As suggested, high and low levels of rational influence use was associated with heightened levels of tension. The second example, representing restricted nonlinearity, examines the politics perceptions–job tension relationship that has been demonstrated in previous research (Ferris, Adams, Kolodinsky, Hochwarter, & Ammeter, 2002). Politics is a pervasive phenomenon in organizations. However, its adverse impact is likely to be invariant across individuals and settings. Task interdependence represented the moderator of the nonlinear politics perceptions–job tension relationship. We contend that politics is more prone to lead to increases in job tension when (a) individuals are reliant on others for information, resources, and support (i.e., high interdependence) and (b) when politics are either low or high.

Job Tension

High

Low

Low

High

Rationality Fig. 1.

Nonlinear Relationship between Rationality Influence Tactics and Job Tension.

Assumed Linearity

215

High

Job Tension

High Interdependence Low Interdependence

Low Low

High

Politics Perceptions Fig. 2.

Interactive Effects of Politics Perceptions and Task Interdependence on Job Tension.

When politics is low, individuals working closely with others are not able to gather information from the informal environment that dictates behavior internal to the group. Conversely, high levels of politicking may cause individuals to question the motives of those with whom they work most closely. For those low in task interdependence, we expect the politics perception relationship with job tension to be consistent with previous research (e.g., positive and linear). Data gathered from 198 police officers offered support for the hypothesized relationship. Specifically, the politics perceptions2
task interdependence interaction term explained incremental variance. As shown in Fig 2, perceived politicking was related to job tension in a curvilinear manner for those reporting high levels of task interdependence. In absolute terms, job tension was highest for this group when politicking was high. The relationship for those with low levels of interdependence was linear and direct as expected.

A NONLINEAR INTEGRATION OF STRESS THEORY To this point, we have argued that theory development and assessment within the organizational sciences is biased toward linear construction and evaluation. We now turn our attention to the specific case of stress research to demonstrate how these biases have unintentionally masked the nonlinear

216

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

dimensions of dominant stress paradigms, and driven research to premature acceptance of linear predictions (e.g., Sikora, Beaty, & Forward, 2004).

Confusion in the Early Stress–Performance Relationship Closer attention to theoretical development may be necessary for researchers to reduce much of the confusion that has permeated stress research in general, and the stress–performance literature, specifically. Previous research has identified both positive (Arsenault & Dolan, 1983) and negative (Greer & Castro, 1986) linear stress–performance relationships. However, the dominant conceptualization employed in the literature has been that of an inverted-U form, with high and low levels of tension inhibiting performance (Levi, 1972; Yerkes & Dodson, 1908). This conceptualization is based on the belief that low levels of stress fail to cause a level of arousal sufficient to elicit activity, whereas too much stress can potentially cause debilitating effects due to over-activation (McGrath, 1976; Selye, 1975). Despite the intuitive appeal of this conceptualization (Sullivan & Bhagat, 1992), academic research has failed to consistently support its basic tenets (Muse, Harris, & Feild, 2003), leading to a considerable degree of admonishment (Westman & Eden, 1996) including a call to ‘‘retire both the construct and hypothesis’’ (Neiss, 1988, p. 361). Although empirical research consistently has not found strong support for activation theory, we argue that there is enough conceptual evidence to justify the continued pursuit of nonlinear relationships. As such, dismissing the influence of activation in this realm may be premature without more tangible evidence. Examining appraisal-based and resource-based perspectives of stress may be helpful in shedding further light on the relationship between stress and performance. Scholars supportive of each framework have engaged in a robust discussion of the merits of their relative positions (see special issue of Applied Psychology, 2001). Whereas this discussion can be seen as an exercise in demonstrating the dominance of one paradigm over the other, we prefer to view this dialogue as an opportunity to acknowledge the merits of both perspectives. Furthermore, we believe that the two paradigms complement, rather than subsume one another, and that the utility of each approach is more apparent when we move beyond the traditionally linear methodologies by which these frameworks have been developed and evaluated. In the following section, we briefly (and humbly) state our opinion regarding the value of each

Assumed Linearity

217

framework. Then, we introduce activation theory as an opportunity to explain nonlinear relationships within stress research.

Appraisal-Based: Transactional Stress Approach One of the dominant stress paradigms was advanced by Lazarus (1966) nearly four decades ago. Lazarus and his colleagues’ integrated model of stress identified two fundamental processes: appraisal and coping. These concepts collectively have produced an impressive stream of supportive research (e.g., Baumeister, Faber, & Wallace, 1999; Smith, Haynes, Lazarus, & Pope, 1993; Zellars & Perrewe´, 2001). The first of these, appraisal, can be thought of as ‘‘a process through which the person evaluates whether a particular encounter with the environment is relevant to his or her well-being’’ (Folkman, Lazarus, DunkelSchetter, DeLongis, & Gruen, 1986, p. 992). Embedded in this appraisal are two sequential evaluations of the threat or benefit of the event (i.e., primary appraisal), and the opportunity to overcome the stressor (i.e., secondary appraisal). The second process, coping, identifies the strategies that individuals utilize to balance stressful environmental demands. Folkman and her colleagues (1986) suggested that there are three key features of coping. First, coping is focused on changes in the cognitive and behavioral processes of an individual as a stressful event evolves. Second, the context of the situation, as defined by the inherent demands and available resources, interacts with individual responses to create a dynamic interpretation of the event. Third, coping is seen as neither a positive nor negative phenomenon. In this regard, coping is classified as all efforts that employees undertake to overcome work-related strain, including the management of internal and external resources.

Resources-Based: Conservation of Resources Theory Although not incongruent with appraisal-based perspectives of stress, conservation of resources (COR) theory provides unique insights into the dynamics of work-related strain. Proponents of COR theory argue that this awareness is achieved by casting stress as a cumulative rather than a momentary phenomenon, and from explicitly acknowledging the social context within which the individual is embedded (Hobfoll, 2001).

218

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

The definition of resource classes is central to the application of COR theory. Previous research indicates that there are four general classes of resources: personal characteristics, object, condition, and energy (Hobfoll, 1989, 2001). Personal characteristics are resources to the extent that they assist an employee to positively frame their organizational experience (e.g., self-esteem, positive affect). Object resources are those that are physical in nature, and obtain value by aiding in survival or from their scarcity (e.g., home, vehicles, diamonds). Condition resources are conduits of resource acquisition and include valued work roles and tenure. Similarly, energy resources (e.g., knowledge, money) provide access to other resources, although they have no tangible value (Hobfoll & Wells, 1998). From this perspective, COR proponents have argued, ‘‘individuals strive to obtain, retain, protect, and foster things that they value’’ (Hobfoll, 2001, p. 341). This framework suggests that stress will occur in one of three situations: when the employee’s resources are threatened with loss; when the employee’s resources are actually lost; and/or when an employee is unable to obtain adequate resource returns from a preceding resource investment. Building on this discussion, COR theory has important implications for stress research. First, COR implies that employees must invest resources to overcome threats to existing resource pools. Second, resource deficient employees are the most vulnerable to additional resource losses, and the least capable of acquiring additional resources.

Nonlinear Capacity of COR and Appraisal Resource deficiencies have been used as an explanation of an interactive relationship between stress and job performance. For example, emotional exhaustion has been presented as a condition in which an employee is deficient in resources (Demerouti, Bakker, & Bulters, 2004; Iverson, Olekalns, & Erwin, 1998; Zellars & Perrewe´, 2001; Zellars, Perrewe´, & Hochwarter, 2000). Individuals experiencing high levels of emotional exhaustion are unable to accumulate the resources necessary to overcome occupational stressors and maintain adequate levels of performance and well-being (Wright & Cropanzano, 1998). Unfortunately, proponents of this interactive approach have fallen victim to the methodological pitfall previously mentioned of not evaluating the nonlinear potential of the phenomenon. We suggest that there is ample theoretical rationale to suggest that nonlinear characterizations of the stress – performance relationship are at least as plausible as interactive conceptualizations.

Assumed Linearity

219

Lazarus’ work has not ignored the importance of resources within the appraisal or coping processes (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). However, we believe that Hobfoll’s (2001) work is an important extension to the breadth and depth of our understanding of individual resources constraints, demands, and reserves in stress relations. Thus, rather than argue for the dominance of one perspective over another, we propose that COR provides a useful framework to demonstrate the discontinuous and/or nonlinear nature of the stress–performance relationship. To demonstrate the process through which this occurs, we suggest that viewing these perspectives as complementary, rather than contradictory, helps establish the fundamental premise of transactional psychology. Namely, occupational stress must be viewed within the broader context of life stress (Bhagat & Allie, 1989). To this point, COR theory identifies investment and the primacy of resource loss as building blocks to understanding stressor–strain relationships. As resources are gained or lost, stress occurs. However, the slope and impact of loss is greater/steeper than that for gain (Hobfoll, 1989). Thus, resource loss is conceptualized as more salient than resource gain (primacy of loss). Unique to COR theory is the identification of resource acquisition as a fulfillment of the goal of proactive coping. That is, employees actively seek to improve their resource pool, which serves to buffer employees from the threats posed by objective, environmental stressors. Indeed, Lazarus and Folkman (1984) pointed to resources as an important determinant of vulnerability to stress when a deficit exists in an area of critical importance to the individual. Thus, resource deficits do not, in themselves, trigger stress. Instead, resource deficits represent an increased potential for an event to be perceived as stressful if the commitments threatened are vital to the interests of the employee. Given these ideas, resources should demonstrate at least a nonlinear, if not a discontinuous, effect on the conversion of stressors to strain. Beyond COR theory, this nonlinear conceptualization is supported by activation theory. Activation theory argues ‘‘[j]ob stress occurs whenever job-related stimuli cause a job holder’s experienced activation level to deviate substantially from one’s characteristic level of activation’’ (Gardner & Cummings, 1988, p. 106). That is, when there is disequilibrium of resources, such that when an individual possesses too few resources, they will experience elevated levels of strain. However, in conditions where the person has an abundance of resources, the environmental stressors will not trigger the strain response. Rather than a linear trend, this concept implies a disjointed ‘‘breaking point’’ where the addition of a stressor overpowers the resource reserves of the employee.

220

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

If activation theory is further extended, it could be argued that in high and low resource conditions, job performance suffers. Previous research has supported the intuitively appealing explanation that individuals with few resources will be unable to overcome work-related strain (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000; Westman, Hobfoll, Chen, Davidson, & Laski, 2004). However, it is less apparent how an abundance of resources would affect the stress–performance relationship. In the preceding paragraphs, we have argued that employees with a deep reservoir of resources will be less likely to experience the strain-related consequences of increased levels of stress (e.g., decreased performance). Thus, the employee is not activated to the point of interest, challenge, or engagement in the work. This suggests that optimum performance is achieved in situations that stimulate the employee to rally resources to overcome work-related challenges. This interpretation supports the notion that designing complex jobs is only advantageous to an organization to the degree that it does not overwhelm the employees with its complexity (Xie & Johns, 1995). These findings mirror the inverted U-shaped distribution characteristic of stress– performance relationships. This discussion brings to light the perspective that ‘‘more isn’t always better’’ by demonstrating that a ‘‘too much of good thing’’ perspective probably permeates many contemporary work environments. Building on this point, we discuss a stream of research that has examined linear forms exclusively, at the expense of other forms that may depict organizational phenomenon more accurately. In the next section, we briefly review conceptual logic of the felt accountability–job tension relationship in both linear and nonlinear forms. Following this, we report the results of a series of studies that have demonstrated the utility of expanding the scope of analysis to include not only nonlinear independent–dependent variable forms, but the influence of moderators on this relationship as well.

LINEARITY/NONLINEARITY IN STRESS RESEARCH: EMPIRICAL EXAMPLES In a recent investigation (Hochwarter, Perrewe´, Hall, & Ferris, 2005), the felt accountability–job tension relationship was examined across levels of negative affectivity. Felt accountability is defined as an expectation that decisions or actions will be evaluated by relevant others with the understanding that the potential for one to receive either rewards or sanctions

Assumed Linearity

221

exists (Hochwarter et al., 2005). Theoretically, it was proposed that the accountability–job tension relationship is nonlinear (a U-shape form will emerge), and that this form is influenced by negative affectivity. By default, the supposition of nonlinearity indicates that accountability can predict both positive and negative effects on job tension. The premise of this study, and others examining felt-accountability effects in organizations (Hall et al., 2003), is that accountability is best conceived as one of the many stressors individuals face at work. For example, those held accountable are subjected to increased scrutiny by decision makers (Ferris, Mitchell, Canavan, Frink, & Hopper, 1995). Further, heightened levels of accountability might produce strain because employees feel they are being overly controlled and pressured to validate their decisions and behaviors (Green, Visser, & Tetlock, 2000). Finally, the stress-related consequences of accountability are supported when a ‘‘web of accountabilities’’ (Frink & Klimoski, 1998; Tetlock & Lerner, 1999), in which one is answerable to multiple constituents simultaneously, is considered. In support of a linear representation, Hall et al. (2003) reported that higher levels of felt accountability were associated with increased job tension and emotional labor. However, if felt accountability is a stressor, nonlinear forms need to be considered. Further, research has indicated that perceptions of organizational phenomena often are affected by individuals’ affective disposition (Spector & Jex, 1998; Watson & Pennebaker, 1989). Hochwarter et al. (in press) hypothesized that the felt accountability–job tension relationship would be linear for high NAs, and nonlinear (i.e., U-shape) for low NAs. High NAs tend to worry more, are nervous in the face of stressors and suffer from higher levels of evaluation apprehension than low NAs (Spector, Chen, & O’Connell, 2000). Conversely, low NAs are more representative of individuals prone to experience nonlinear stressor–strain relationships, as suggested by advocates of activation theory (Muse et al., 2003). Specifically, low levels of felt accountability do not offer a level of sociability that is desired. Further, absent is the opportunity to secure outcomes consistent with their inherent disposition. Results from two studies supported the nonlinear felt accountability–job tension relationship for sample respondents (Study 2), as well as the hypothesized linear and nonlinear forms for high and low NAs, respectively. In absolute terms, job tension for high and low NA was comparable at extreme levels of felt accountability (i.e., very high). However, the paths to reach high levels of job tension were inconsistent as high NAs approached this level directly, whereas low NAs took a different route.

222

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

Lessons from this Study In addition to contributing to the felt accountability and affective disposition literatures, the results offered in these series of studies have implication for virtually all research conducted in the organizational sciences. First, the two-way interaction term was not significant in the first sample. Second, the nonlinear felt accountability–job tension relationship failed to reach significance in sample 1. However, NA moderated the nonlinear felt accountability–job tension relationship (i.e., accountability2
NAtension). Taken together, these findings suggest that the inability to pursue more intricate relational forms may have caused this study to secure a place in the ‘‘drawer of non-significant results’’ (Rosenthal, 1979). Further, these results offer evidence that both restricted and non-restricted nonlinearity may exist in one research environment. Finally, because these results were replicated across largely diverse settings, there is greater confidence in the validity of the findings.

PROSPECTS FOR CHANGE There are a number of issues that characterize prospects for change in raising consciousness regarding nonlinear dynamics in occupational stress and well-being theory and research. We address these issues in the following sections.

Parsimony, Complexity, and Theory Building Parsimony, or economy in explanation, has been a traditional objective of theory development. However, there may be misinterpretation of the nature of parsimony that might have hindered the progress of nonlinear theory in management scholarship. Bacharach (1989, p. 509) suggested that: ‘‘ythe role of theory in science is the integration and simplification of experience.’’ Therefore, a theory that reduces real-world complexity should be considered preferable to one that does not. Bacharach further speculated, ‘‘ythe primary risk in theoretical parsimony is the under-specification of the model’’ (p. 509). We would add to that statement a concern with the over-simplification of the proposed relationships in the spirit of reducing complexity, even if it does not accurately capture the dynamics of the phenomenon of interest.

Assumed Linearity

223

Furthermore, Landy and Vasey (1984, p. 4) argued that parsimony represents the ‘‘simplest explanation that can account for the phenomenon.’’ However, we would argue that the focus on the term ‘‘simplest’’ tends to outweigh the term ‘‘account for a phenomenon,’’ which reduces interest in more complex relations like nonlinearity. Also, Landy and Vasey (1984) suggested that ‘‘simplest’’ is interpreted as the fewest number of predictor variables, moderator variables, and so forth. Substantive research can examine one nonlinear predictor as easily as one linear construct, as long as this tactic is accompanied with theoretical appropriateness. We suggest that the objective of parsimony is an important one, and should continue to influence theory development. However, we encourage theorists to insure that simplicity not be imposed unnecessarily and at the expense of insufficiently explaining the phenomena of interest. As such, nonlinear dynamics might receive fairer consideration if this view is considered more fully.

Theoretical Potential of ‘‘Time’’ in Nonlinearity Time represents a necessary consideration when assimilating nonlinear associations between variables (see Bluedorn & Denhardt, 1988 and George & Jones, 2000 for reviews). The onset of change is rarely predictable, its intensity is inconsistent, and its form is sometimes unstable (Mitchell & James, 2001); each of which offers support for the occurrence of nonlinear phenomena. Thus, understanding the ‘‘when’’ of attitude formation and requisite behaviors is essential. This is an important area of opportunity because, as Mitchell and James (2001, p. 532) stated, ‘‘We do not delve into these more complex relationships for one major reason: they are, as yet, not well represented in the published literature.’’ Linear models imply virtually no independent–dependent variable adjustments over time. For example, a linear model would presumably argue that increases in job demands are associated with parallel increases in tension. Alternatively, nonlinear models maintain that behavioral reactions to contextual stimuli are discontinuous (George & Jones, 2000). Thus, there may be times that low levels of job demands are viewed negatively due to the boredom that is manifested, and times that moderate levels of job demands are invigorating. Furthermore, very high levels of job demands may suggest the employees are being pulled in multiple directions, causing strain. According to George and Jones (2001), it is important to consider the role of time in examining causes and consequences of relationships in

224

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

organizations. Others (e.g., Vallacher, Read, & Nowak, 2002) have suggested that nonlinear dynamic systems demonstrate the greatest utility for prediction when time-dependent measures are employed as predictor variables. We share the view of Heiby (1995, p. 7), who suggested that researchers ‘‘adopt more temporally sensitive measurement approaches and data analytic techniques in addition to those based on the general linear models.’’

Replication as Necessity with Complex Relationships Two important points need to be made concerning research replications. First, the published management literature reveals a conspicuous absence of replications, suggesting they are neither seen as important by researchers, nor valued by journal editors (Mone & McKinley, 1993; Tsang & Kwan, 1999). Second, replications are even more important for studies with complex relationships, to insure that results are repeatable and not artifactual to particular samples and/or settings. It is surprising that the field does not see more replications, given their recognized importance for the advancement of science. As noted by Popper (1959, p. 45), ‘‘We do not take even our own observations quite seriously, or accept them as scientific observation, until we have repeated and tested them. Only by such repetitions can we convince ourselves that we are not dealing with a mere isolated ‘coincidence,’ but with events which, on account of their regularity and reproducibility, are in principle intersubjectively testable.’’ Although replications cannot definitively verify or falsify theories, they can build evidence to either discredit or support their basic tenets (Tsang & Kwan, 1999). Indeed, the advancement of the organizational sciences is contingent upon ‘‘yvigorous contesting of the latest and most influential intellectual trends and ideas’’ (Porter, 1996, p. 267). Replications can take several forms, ranging from the exact or literal replication, where conditions are all identical to the original study, to constructive replications or generalizations and extensions, which employ different measures of constructs, apply different data analyzes, and/or collect samples from different populations (Lykken, 1968; Tsang & Kwan, 1999). Some journals in the field of psychology virtually mandate multiple studies in a single article, frequently focusing on literal and/or constructive replications (e.g., Journal of Personality and Social Psychology). In her editorial statement as the outgoing editor of the Academy of Management Journal, Anne Tsui (1999) suggested to the incoming editor that he ought to

Assumed Linearity

225

encourage multiple-study manuscripts to be submitted to the journal in the future. These could analyze different hypotheses related to the area of study, use different methods and/or measures of constructs to test the same hypotheses, or examine multiple levels of analysis. An examination of several management journals, which publish empirical studies, was conducted to observe the incidence of multi-study articles published that reported on replications and/or extensions. Issues of the Academy of Management Journal, Administrative Science Quarterly, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Journal of Management over the past three years were reviewed. Only 16.3% (i.e., 98 out of 601) of the articles published, contained multiple studies. Of this work reporting replications/ extensions, the single journal accounting for the most publications was the Journal of Applied Psychology, with the other articles spread equally across the other three journals. Interestingly, the search for novel organizational theories (i.e., those that are unique, new, and different from existing frameworks) tends to be associated with reduced interest in replications (McKinley et al., 1999; Mone & McKinley, 1993). We find this surprising, and, in fact, would have predicted just the opposite. Specifically, we would assert that novel and/or complex theories should lead to more efforts to replicate. We certainly would argue this for studies involving nonlinear relationships.

CONCLUSION Theory and method should work collaboratively to build a science of organizations. In so doing, we observe that the outcome of decades of work in this area has been a scientific knowledge base that appears to be disproportionately linear in nature. We make the case that such an outcome is an unintentional conspiracy of theory and method rather than an accurate, representative reflection of reality. It is important to note that we do not propose nonlinear models as strict substitutes for linear interactive conceptualizations. Instead, we propose that each form serves as a complement to the other because of their related underpinnings. For example, both rely on ifythen theorizations (i.e., if X is high and Y is low, then Z ¼ y; if X is high or low, then Z ¼ y). By adding nonlinear perspectives to one’s research toolbox, the potential for more accurately explaining organizational phenomena is greatly enhanced. We suggest that although parsimony traditionally has been an objective of theory building, it should not be sought at the expense of adequate and

226

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

representative description of actual organizational dynamics. The fact is that behavior in organizations is complex, and needs to be modeled as such, which may involve nonlinear relationships and dynamics. This is especially the case in the area of occupational stress and well-being (e.g., Sikora et al., 2004). We need systematic efforts to blend theory and method toward the more accurate characterization of organizational phenomena, and the development of a truly valid and informed science of management and organizations that reflects organizational phenomena as they actually operate; not a contrived and partially valid science that labors under the assumed linearity of organizational phenomena.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank Daniel C. Feldman, Daniel C. Ganster, Terence R. Mitchell, and Jesper B. Sorensen for their comments on an earlier draft of this chapter.

REFERENCES Abbott, A. (1988). Transcending general linear reality. Sociological Theory, 6, 169–186. Arsenault, A., & Dolan, S. (1983). The role of personality, occupation and organization in understanding the relationship between job stress, performance and absenteeism. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 56, 227–240. Avolio, B., Waldman, D., & McDaniel, M. (1990). Age and work performance in nonmanagerial jobs: The effects of experience and occupation and occupational types. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 407–422. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14, 496–515. Barling, J., Kelloway, K., & Cheung, D. (1996). Time management and achievement striving interact to predict car sales performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 821–826. Baumeister, R. F., Faber, J. E., & Wallace, H. M. (1999). Coping and ego depletion. In: C. R. Snyder (Ed.), Coping: The psychology of what works (pp. 50–69). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bedeian, A. G. (2004). Peer review and the social construction of knowledge in the management discipline. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3, 198–216. Bhagat, R. S., & Allie, S. M. (1989). Organizational stress, personal life stress, and symptoms of life strains: An examination of the moderating role of sense of competence. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 35, 231–253. Bluedorn, A., & Denhardt, R. (1988). Time and organization. Journal of Management, 14, A299–320.

Assumed Linearity

227

Caligiuri, P., & Day, D. (2000). Effects of self-monitoring in technical, contextual, and assignment-specific performance. Group and Organization Management, 25, 154–175. Cascio, W. F. (1995). Whither industrial and organizational psychology in a changing world of work. American Psychologist, 50, 928–939. Champoux, J. (1980). A three-sample test of some extensions to the job characteristics model of work motivation. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 466–478. Clark, A., Oswald, A., & Warr, P. (1997). Is job satisfaction U-shaped in age? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69, 57–81. Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (po.05). American Psychologist, 49, 997–1003. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cortina, J. M. (1993). Interaction, nonlinearity, and multicollinearity: Implications for multiple regression. Journal of Management, 19, 915–922. Daft, R. L. (1983). Learning the craft of organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 8, 539–546. Daft, R. L. (1995). Why I recommended that your manuscript be rejected and what you can do about it. In: L. L. Cummings & P. J. Frost (Eds), Publishing in the organizational sciences (pp. 164–182). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Daft, R. L., & Lewin, A. Y. (1993). Where are the theories for the ‘‘new’’ organizational forms? An editorial essay. Organization Science, 4, i–iv. Davis, M. S. (1971). That’s interesting! Towards a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1, 309–344. de Jonge, J., Reuves, M., Houtman, I., Bongers, P., & Kompier, M. (2000). Linear and nonlinear relations between psychosocial job characteristics, subjective outcomes, and sickness absence: Baseline results from SMASH. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 256–268. de Jonge, J., & Schaufeli, W. (1998). Job characteristics and employee well-being: A test of Warr’s vitamin model in health care workers using structural equation modeling. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 387–407. Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., & Bulters, A. (2004). The loss spiral of work pressure, work– home interface and exhaustion: Reciprocal relations in a three-wave study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 131–149. Dimaggio, P. J. (1995). Comments on ‘‘what theory is not’’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 391–397. Elsbach, K., Sutton, R., & Whetten, D. (1999). Perspectives on developing management theory, circa 1999: Moving from shrill monologues to (relatively) tame dialogues. Academy of Management Review, 24, 627–633. Ferris, G. R., Adams, G., Kolodinsky, R. W., Hochwarter, W. A., & Ammeter, A. P. (2002). Perceptions of organizational politics: Theory and research directions. In: F. J. Yammarino & F. Dansereau (Eds), Research in multi-level issues, Volume 1: The many faces of multi-level issues (pp. 179–254). Oxford, UK: JAI Press/Elsevier Science. Ferris, G. R., Mitchell, T. R., Canavan, P. J., Frink, D. D., & Hopper, H. (1995). Accountability in human resource systems. In: G. R. Ferris, S. D. Rosen & D. T. Barnum (Eds), Handbook of human resource management (pp. 175–196). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers. Fields, M. W. (1984). Exploratory data analysis in organizational research. In: T. S. Bateman & G. R. Ferris (Eds), Method and analysis in organizational research (pp. 81–92). Reston, VA: Reston Publishing Co.

228

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

Folkman, S., Lazarus, R. S., Dunkel-Schetter, C., DeLongis, A., & Gruen, R. (1986). Dynamics of a stressful encounter: Cognitive appraisal, coping, and encounter outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 571–579. Frink, D. D., & Klimoski, R. J. (1998). Toward a theory of accountability in organizations and human resources management. In: G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resource management (Vol. 16, pp. 1–51). Stamford, CT: JAI Press. Ganzach, Y. (1997). Misleading interaction and curvilinear terms. Psychological Review, 2, 235–247. Gardner, D., & Cummings, L. (1988). Activation theory and job design: Review and reconceptualization. In: B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 10, pp. 81–122). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. George, J., & Jones, G. (2000). The role of time in theory and theory building. Journal of Management, 26, 657–684. Graziano, W., Jensen-Campbell, L., & Hair, E. (1996). Perceiving interpersonal conflict and reacting to it: The case of agreeableness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 820–835. Green, M. C., Visser, P. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (2000). Coping with accountability cross-pressures: Low-effort evasive tactics and high effort quests for complex compromises. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1380–1391. Greer, C., & Castro, M. (1986). The relationship between perceived unit effectiveness and occupational stress: The case of purchasing agents. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22, 159–175. Guion, R. M. (1998). Some virtues of dissatisfaction in the science and practice of personnel selection. Human Resource Management Review, 8, 351–365. Hall, A. T., Frink, D. D., Ferris, G. R., Hochwarter, W. A., Kacmar, C. J., & Bowen, M. G. (2003). Accountability in human resources management. In: C. A. Schriesheim & L. Neider (Eds), New directions in human resource management (pp. 29–63). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing (A volume in the Research in Management series). Heiby, E. (1995). Chaos theory, nonlinear dynamical models, and psychological assessment. Psychological Assessment, 7, 5–9. Hobfoll, S. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513–524. Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50, 337–421. Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (2000). Conservation of resources theory: Applications to stress and management in the workplace. In: R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of organization behavior (pp. 57–81). New York: Dekker. Hobfoll, S. E., & Wells, J. D. (1998). Conservation of resources, stress, and aging: Why do some slide and some spring? In: J. Lomranz (Ed.), Handbook of aging and mental health: An integrative approach (pp. 121–134). New York: Plenum Press. Hochwarter, W. A., & Byrne, Z. S. (2005). Leader member exchange and job tension: Linear and non-linear effects across levels of affective disposition. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19, 505–520. Hochwarter, W. A., & Witt, L. A. (2004). Perceived support and performance: Relationships across levels of cynicism. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago, IL.

Assumed Linearity

229

Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., Perrewe´, P. L., Canty, A., Frink, D. D., & Berkson, H. (2001a). Reconsidering the job performance-turnover relationship: The role of gender in form and magnitude. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 2357–2377. Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., Perrewe´, P. L., Witt, L. A., & Kiewitz, C. (2001b). A note on the nonlinearity of the age–job satisfaction relationship. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 1223–1237. Hochwarter, W. A., Perrewe´, P. L., Hall, A. T., & Ferris, G. R. (2005). Negative affectivity as a moderator of the form and magnitude of the relationship between felt accountability and job tension. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 517–534. Humphrey, S. E., Moon, H., Conlon, D. E., & Hoffman, D. A. (2004). Decision making and behavioral fluidity: How focus on completion and emphasis on safety changes over the course of projects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 93, 14–27. Iverson, R. D., Olekalns, M., & Erwin, P. J. (1998). Affectivity, organizational stressors, and absenteeism: A causal model of burnout and its consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52, 1–23. Jackofsky, E. F. (1984). Turnover and job performance: An integrated process model. Academy of Management Review, 9, 74–83. Jackofsky, E., Ferris, K., & Breckenridge, B. (1986). Evidence for a curvilinear relationship between performance and turnover. Journal of Management, 12, 105–111. Janssen, O. (2001). Fairness perceptions as a moderator in the curvilinear relationships between job demands, and job performance and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1039–1050. Kacmar, K. M., & Ferris, G. R. (1989). Theoretical and methodological considerations in the age–job satisfaction relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 201–207. Kaplan, A. (1964). The conduct of inquiry: Methodology for behavioral science. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell. Keller, R. (1984). The role of performance and absenteeism in the prediction of turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 176–183. Kipnis, D., Schmidt, S. M., & Wilkinson, I. (1980). Intraorganizational influence tactics: Explorations in getting one’s way. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 440–452. Landy, F. J., & Vasey, J. (1984). Theory and logic in human resources research. In: K. M. Rowland & G. R. Ferris (Eds), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 2, pp. 1–34). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. New York: McGraw-Hill. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer. Leavitt, H. J. (1996). The old days, hot groups, and managers’ lib. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 288–300. Levi, L. (1972). Stress and distress in response to psychosocial stimuli. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press. Lim, Y. (1993). Time dimensions of work. Relationship with perceived organizational performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 8, 91–102. Lubinski, D., & Humphreys, L. G. (1990). Assessing spurious moderator effects: Illustrated substantively with the hypothesized (synergistic) relation between spatial and mathematical ability. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 385–393. Lundberg, C. C. (1976). Hypothesis creation in organizational behavior research. Academy of Management Review, 1, 5–12.

230

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

Lykken, D. T. (1968). Statistical significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 151–159. Macan, T. (1994). Time management: Test of a process model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 381–391. MacCallum, R. C., & Mar, C. M. (1995). Distinguishing between moderator and quadratic effects in multiple regression. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 405–421. Martin, T., Price, J., & Mueller, C. (1981). Job performance and turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 116–119. McGrath, J. E. (1976). Stress and behavior in organizations. In: M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1351–1395). Chicago: Rand McNally. McKinley, W., Mone, M. A., & Moon, G. (1999). Determinants and development of schools in organization theory. Academy of Management Review, 24, 634–648. Mitchell, T. R., & James, L. R. (2001). Building better theory: Time and the specification of when things happen. Academy of Management Review, 26, 530–547. Mone, M. A., & McKinley, W. (1993). The uniqueness value and its consequences for organization studies. Journal of Management Inquiry, 2, 284–296. Mossholder, K., Bedeian, A., Norris, D., Giles, W., & Feild, H. (1988). Job performance and turnover decisions: Two field studies. Journal of Management, 14, 403–414. Muse, L., Harris, S., & Feild, S. (2003). Has the inverted-U theory of stress and job performance had a fair test? Human Performance, 16, 349–364. Neiss, R. (1988). Re-conceptualizing arousal: Psychological states in motor performance. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 345–366. Podaskoff, P., & Dalton, D. (1987). Research methodology in organizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, 419–441. Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchison. Porter, L. W. (1996). Forty years of organization studies: Reflections from a micro perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 262–269. Robertson, I. T. (1994). Personality and personnel selection. In: C. L. Cooper & D. M. Rousseau (Eds), Trends in organizational behavior (pp. 75–89). London: Wiley. Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638–641. Schneider, R. J., & Hough, L. M. (1995). Personality and industrial/organizational psychology. In: C. L. Cooper & I. Robertson (Eds), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 75–129). Chichester, England: Wiley. Selye, H. (1975). Stress without distress. New York: McGraw-Hill. Sikora, P. B., Beaty, E. D., & Forward, J. (2004). Updating theory on organizational stress: The asynchronous multiple overlapping change (AMOC) model of workplace stress. Human Resource Development Review, 3, 3–35. Smith, C., Haynes, K. N., Lazarus, R. S., & Pope, L. K. (1993). In search of the hot cognitions: Attributions, appraisals, and their relation to emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 916–929. Spector, P. E., Chen, P. Y., & O’Connell, B. J. (2000). A longitudinal study of relations between job stressors and job strains while controlling for prior negative affectivity and strains. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 211–218. Spector, P. E., & Jex, S. M. (1998). Development of four self-report measures of job stressors and strain: Interpersonal conflict at work scale, organizational constraints scale,

Assumed Linearity

231

quantitative workload inventory, and physical symptoms inventory. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 356–367. Sullivan, S. E., & Bhagat, R. S. (1992). Organizational stress, job satisfaction and job performance: Where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 18, 353–374. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 371–384. Tetlock, P. E., & Lerner, J. (1999). The social contingency model: Identifying empirical and normative boundary conditions on the error-and-bias portrait of human nature. In: S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds), Dual process models in social psychology (pp. 571–595). New York: Guilford Press. Tett, R. (1998). Is conscientiousness ALWAYS related to job performance? The Industrial Psychologist, 36, 24–29. Thorngate, W. (1976). Possible limits on a science of social behavior. In: J. Strickland, F. Aboud & J. Gergen (Eds), Social psychology in transition (pp. 121–139). New York: Plenum. Trevor, C. O., Gerhart, B., & Boudreau, J. W. (1997). Voluntary turnover and job performance: Curvilinearity and the moderating influences of salary growth and promotions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 44–61. Tsang, E. W. K., & Kwan, K. M. (1999). Replication and theory development in organizational science: A critical realist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24, 759–780. Tsui, A. S. (1999). From the editor. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 589–590. Valentine, S. (1999). Assessing organizational behavior models: A comparison of linear and nonlinear methods. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 1028–1044. Vallacher, R., Read, S., & Nowak, A. (2002). The dynamical perspective in personality and social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 264–273. Waldman, D., Atwater, L., & Davidson, R. (2004). The role of individualism and the five-factor model in the prediction of performance in a leaderless group discussion. Journal of Personality, 72, 1–16. Warr, P. (1987). Work, unemployment, and mental health. New York: Oxford University Press. Watson, D., & Pennebaker, J. W. (1989). Health complaints, stress, and distress: Exploring the central role of negative affectivity. Psychological Review, 96, 234–254. Weick, K. E. (1989). Theory construction as disciplined imagination. Academy of Management Review, 14, 516–531. Weick, K. E. (1999). Theory construction as disciplined reflexivity: Tradeoffs in the 90s. Academy of Management Review, 24, 797–806. Westman, M., & Eden, D. (1996). The inverted-U relationship between stress and performance: A field study. Work and Stress, 10, 165–173. Westman, M., Hobfoll, S. E., Chen, S., Davidson, O. B., & Laski, S. (2004). Organizational stress through the lens of COR Theory. In: P. L. Perrewe´ & D. C. Ganster (Eds), Research in occupational stress and well-being: Exploring interpersonal dynamics (Vol. 4, pp. 167–220). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science Ltd. Whetten, D. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14, 490–495. Williams, C., & Livingstone, L. (1994). A second look at the relationship between performance and voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 219–231. Wright, T., & Bonett, D. (2002). The moderating effects of employee tenure on the relation between organizational commitment and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1183–1190.

232

GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Emotional exhaustion as a predictor of job performance and voluntary turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 486–493. Xie, J., & Johns, G. (1995). Job scope and stress: Can job scope be too high? Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1288–1309. Yerkes, R., & Dodson, J. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 61, 459–462. Zellars, K. L., & Perrewe´, P. L. (2001). Affective personality and the content of emotional social support: Coping in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 459–467. Zellars, K. L., Perrewe´, P. L., & Hochwarter, W. A. (2000). Burnout in healthcare: The role of the five factors of personality. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 1570–1598.

LOCATING BEHAVIORAL CYNICISM AT WORK: CONSTRUCT ISSUES AND PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS Pamela Brandes and Diya Das ABSTRACT In this article, we situate organizational cynicism at the nexus of the related constructs of burnout, stress, and antisocial behavior. We expand Dean, Brandes, and Dharwadkar’s (1998) notion of behavioral cynicism to include cynical humor and cynical criticism. We also propose that cynical behavior has important, non-linear effects on employee work performance. Finally, we suggest that cynical behavior may act as a coping mechanism for employees and that such behavior moderates the stress– performance relationship.

INTRODUCTION Envision a flier, posted on a corkboard in a well-trafficked area in a corporate workplace. Printed on the flier is a graphic of a flock of geese flying in

Employee Health, Coping and Methodologies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 5, 233–266 Copyright r 2006 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(05)05007-9

233

234

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

a ‘‘V’’ formation against the outline of a round, bright sun. The flock of geese exemplifies both teamwork and leadership. Each bird in the flock drafts off the current of air from the bird in front, making it easier for the group to fly farther with less effort – the epitome of teamwork. When the lead bird near the tip of the ‘‘V’’ gets tired, other birds assume the leader’s role. The company chose this tranquil symbol to represent one of its new employee teams, whose mission was to promote continuous improvement efforts within the organization. The corresponding text of the flier encouraged employees to participate in one of these teams. However, it is difficult not to notice several additions to the flier, including graffiti over the symbol of the sun that, with the help of the artist/commentator, transformed the sun into the crosshairs of a gun viewfinder, thereby ‘‘targeting’’ the unsuspecting geese. In an organizational context, this humorous modification of the flier might be explained by one of two theories. First, perhaps some employees did not perceive that the improvement teams were truly independent of senior management or believed that employees who attempted to bring up more substantive issues were likely to be ‘‘shot down.’’ Second, members selected for the teams may have felt targeted, in that they were not provided the time, support, or resources needed to be successful. Serving on committees required significant coordination efforts with colleagues from other departments, as well as lots of time spent in meetings – often with little recognition or reward. In either case, the cross-hair graffiti indicates a certain amount of cynicism regarding the improvement teams. Such displays of cynicism at work may be considered negative behavior. However, we investigate the ways in which organizational cynicism, specifically, in the form of cynical behavior, actually may have some positive effects. In fact, it may be that cynical behavior is a form of expression that could increase employees’ critical thinking, as well as form the basis by which employees can express frustrations. Furthermore, cynical behavior may serve as an important coping mechanism that may keep stress and burnout at bay. In this article, we attempt to locate the construct of organizational cynicism within the arena of other supposedly common negative experiences and/or behaviors in organizations. Although there is a spate of research on the positive dimensions of work, a relative silence about the ‘‘darker side’’ of work life persists (Meyerson, 1990). More specifically, we aim to understand the behavioral side of this cynicism. Our interest is in how the criticisms and the witticisms – sometimes public, sometimes clandestine – of organizationally cynical employees may relate to their performance.

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

235

RESEARCH QUESTIONS After we briefly review traditional cynicism, our first main purpose is to investigate theoretically the areas of commonality and differences between organizational cynicism and its ‘‘close cousins’’ within management literature, particularly constructs of a negative nature. Namely, we hope to understand: How does cynicism relate to and compare with other management constructs? Several potential candidates present themselves for this comparison; in particular, we select burnout, stress, and antisocial behavior because common usage suggests they often co-occur with cynicism. Yet acknowledging the similarities and differences among these constructs is important to avoid the ‘‘conceptual redundancy’’ (e.g., Morrow, 1983) that seems to plague the field. In particular, we hope to clarify how these constructs differ from and/or complement organizational cynicism in terms of their definitions, antecedents, correlates, consequences, and the relative importance of personal versus situational determinants, as well as each concept’s proposed relationship with aspects of work performance. In addition, we expand Dean, Brandes, and Dharwadkar’s (1998) notion of behavioral cynicism. Although the body of literature on cynicism continues to grow, most theorizing focuses on the general idea of organizational cynicism (Cutler, 2000; Fleming & Spicer, 2003) or specifically on its affective and cognitive dimensions (Johnson & O’Leary-Kelly, 2003). Currently, there is a lack of a systematic exploration into the more behavioral aspects of cynicism. We propose that cynical behaviors may serve as essential coping mechanisms for employees and that management’s attempts to squash such cynicism may be not only ineffective but harmful, because cynicism may be a way to alleviate employees’ work frustrations. Finally, our article aims to make some theoretical inroads into understanding how cynicism may be related empirically to work outcomes, as well as to stress. Specifically, we review recent research that relates cynicism to in-role performance, extra-role performance, absenteeism and turnover, health, burnout, and work attitudes. We then theoretically explore the relationship between the different aspects of behavioral cynicism with work performance. In this we attempt to argue for a non-linear relationship between the two constructs. Consistent with our ‘‘cynicism as a coping mechanism’’ perspective, we also suggest that behavioral cynicism may moderate the relationship between stress and work outcomes.

236

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

COMPARING ORGANIZATIONAL CYNICISM WITH RELATED CONSTRUCTS Facet analysis has been proposed as a ‘‘procedure [that] can be used for taxonomy, hypothesis generation, or hypothesis testing purposes’’ (Morrow, 1983, p. 486). That is, knowing where and how related concepts overlap is essential for management in both theory and practice. Previous research has reviewed how varieties of cynicism (e.g., personality-based, societal-based, occupationbased, employee, about organizational change) differ, and has distinguished organizational cynicism from related positive constructs, such as organizational commitment, trust, and job satisfaction (Dean et al., 1998). Our aim in this section is largely taxonomic; we attempt to differentiate subspecies of related phenomena in organizations by using facet analysis. As our knowledge and understanding of negativity and other less positive organizational concepts increases, we can more reasonably contrast several conceptual candidates with organizational cynicism – namely, burnout, stress, and antisocial behavior. For each construct, we provide an illustrative but not necessarily exhaustive review, as several reviews already exist in these areas (e.g., Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004; Lee & Ashforth, 1996). Our purpose is to illustrate some of the points of contention and similarity among these various concepts. A Brief History of Cynicism From its early philosophical days, ‘‘cynicism’’ was as much a lifestyle as a philosophy (More, 1923). Cynics often rejected institutions and societal standards, proclaiming even esteemed institutions, such as government and religion, unnatural and worthy of scorn (Dean et al., 1998; Fuller, 1931). Cynics expressed their contempt for institutions in both thought and action. Known for using dramatic and obscene displays to draw people into conversations, during which they could proclaim their views (Mack, 1993), Cynics often relied on humor and made the privileged and the powerful their favorite targets. The term ‘‘cynicism’’ seems to have originated from the Greek word for dog (kyon) or possibly from Cynosarges, a town near Athens where the Cynics had their school (Fuller, 1931; More, 1923). Over time, the words ‘‘cynic,’’ ‘‘cynical,’’ and ‘‘cynicism’’ have taken their place in the English language with meanings loosely derived from the tenets of Cynicism. The Oxford English Dictionary (1989) defines a modern cynic as ‘‘one who shows a disposition to disbelieve in the sincerity or goodness of human motives and actions, and is wont to express this by sneers and sarcasms; a sneering fault-finder’’ (Table 1).

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

237

Organizational Cynicism Having briefly detailed Cynicism as a school of thought, we extend this conceptualization to modern organizations with the name ‘‘organizational cynicism’’ (see Table 1). Dean et al. (1998, p. 345) define organizational cynicism as a negative attitude toward one’s employing organization, comprising three dimensions: (1) a belief that the organization lacks integrity; (2) negative affect toward the organization; and (3) tendencies to disparaging and critical behaviors toward the organization that are consistent with these beliefs and affect.

As such, this multidimensional definition corresponds to three components: beliefs/cognitions, affect, and behavioral tendencies, which have long characterized attitude theory (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993; Hilgard, 1980; Smith, 1947). Consequently, Dean et al. (1998) suggest that organizational cynicism does not represent a personality-like predisposition but rather a state in which people may experience changes over time and that is directed at a specific target (e.g., their employing organization) (cf. Hart, 1997). Cynical beliefs suggest that an organization lacks integrity. Specifically, organizational cynics believe that the practices of their organizations are based on self-interest (e.g., Goldner, Ritti, & Ference, 1977). Organizationally cynical employees often believe that there are hidden motives for organizational actions and thus are unlikely to accept any official rationales advanced by management. Consequently, organizational cynics believe organizational actions lack fairness, honesty, and sincerity. Affect, an essential part of understanding attitudes, is often attached to the object of the belief (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993). Organizational cynicism therefore may include intense emotions that follow from the judgments associated with the cynical beliefs. For example, organizational cynics ‘‘may feel contempt for and anger toward their organization. They may also experience distress, disgust, and even shame when they think about their organization’’ (Dean et al., 1998, p. 346). Similarly, Mishra and Spreitzer (1998, p. 569) suggest that cynical employees experience emotions like ‘‘anger, disgust, and moral outrage’’ (e.g., in the context of layoffs). At the same time, modern organizational cynicism is often accompanied by a feeling of smugness because organizational cynics may believe that they are more knowledgeable or have superior insight about the way things truly are. Consistent with the idea that cynicism contains an undercurrent of righteousness, organizationally cynical employees may experience affect in the form of ‘‘a secret enjoyment

Facet of Analysis Definition/dimensions

Measures

Organizational Cynicism Beliefs that one’s organization is lacking in integrity; negative affect toward the organization (disappointment, frustration); and behavior toward the organization consistent with these beliefs Organizational cynicism scale (Brandes, Dharwadkar, & Dean, 1999)

Psychological contracts

Burnout Exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment (Maslach & Leiter, 1997) Exhaustion and disengagement from work (Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001) Maslach burnout inventory (MBI) (Maslach & Jackson, 1986; Maslach, Jackson, & Leiter, 1996) Oldenberg burnout inventory Work overload Lack of control Insufficient rewards Unfairness Breakdown of community at work Value conflict Job demands (+), job resources (
) (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004)

Occupational Stress

Antisocial Behavior

Good stress/eustress: Challenge related

Actions at workplace with an intent to harm

Bad stress: Hindrance related, associated with feelings of unpleasantness, fear, dread, anxiety, irritation, annoyance, anger, sadness, grief, and depression

Theft, property damage, aggression and violence, rudeness/incivility, breaking rules to harm, argument, and criticism

Work environment scale (Moos, 1982) Job stress survey (Spielberger, 1994) MBI Physiological measures

Individual antisocial behavior scale Group antisocial behavior scale (Robinson & O’Leary-Kelly, 1998)

Role conflict (work–family), ambiguity, overload

Feeling of inequity: Perceived injustice, desire for revenge, aversive treatment

A combination of job demands and job control (high demands and low control lead to high stress) Interpretation of stress environment and available coping mechanisms

Incentive inducements Physical environment

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

Antecedents

Facet Analysis of Organizational Cynicism and Related Concepts.

238

Table 1.

Not yet explored

Should be targeted at the organizational level, but some individual level factors, such as cognitive frames, self determination, and active coping also reduce burnout

Moderate to high, depends on coping Understanding, prediction, and control can reduce the impact of stress on job satisfaction

Organizations can reduce by monitoring, punishment, effective recruitment, and preventing injustice

Political behavior Job self efficacy, social support

Consequences

Not much explored

Psychological/physical strain, stress coping, selfefficacy (Lee & Ashforth, 1990) Engagement (
) Health problems (+), Turnover intent (+) Physical problems

Relationship of construct with performance

Negative linear relationship with in-role performance (Johnson & O’Leary-Kelly, 2003)

Exhaustion predicts poor job performance (Cropanzano, Rupp, & Byrne, 2001)

Problem-focused coping and emotion-focused coping Negative physiological, psychological, and emotional outcomes

Not yet explored

239

Occupational outcomes Good stress: More loyalty, lower job search and quit intentions. Bad stress: High strain, increased intention to quit, lowered job satisfaction with high demands and low control, low job satisfaction, job tension, turnover, absenteeism Stress is negatively related to performance, mediated by the type of affect: depression or anxiety. Depression lowers performance; anxiety improves it

Lowering of morale, fall in profits

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

Strategies of influence

240

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

of their superiority to the organization, which they have judged by their standards and found wanting’’ (Dean et al., 1998, p. 346). Finally, Dean et al.’s (1998) conception suggests a significant behavioral component of cynicism: Organizationally cynical employees display negative, often disparaging behavior toward their organizations, which includes strong criticisms of the organization, such as critical statements that reflect the organization’s lack of honesty or sincerity in dealing with employees and customers. Employees’ cynical behaviors also may include stinging, sarcastic humor that targets the organization or other forms of badmouthing (e.g., Dean et al., 1998; Mishra & Spreitzer, 1998). Finally, cynical behaviors may include nonverbal behaviors such as ‘‘knowing’’ looks and rolled eyes, as well as the smirks and sneers by which cynics have long been recognized. Although behavioral cynicism constituted part of Dean et al.’s initial conceptualization of cynicism, few researchers have sought to investigate the concept theoretically, much less empirically. We suggest that the enactment of cynical behaviors has as yet untheorized consequences for organizations, which we explore subsequently. Whereas some work on organizational cynicism has focused on cynicism in general terms (e.g., Cutler, 2000; Fleming & Spicer, 2003), other recent work has investigated specific components of Dean et al.’s (1998) organizational cynicism concept. For example, in terms of antecedents, Pugh, Skarlicki, and Passell (2003) show that psychological contract violations can predict (cognitive) organizational cynicism regarding a post-layoff employer. Chrobot-Mason (2003) also suggests that contract breaches affect employees’ (cognitive) cynicism levels. In a similar vein, Johnson and O’Leary-Kelly (2003) find that cynicism mediates the relationship between contract breaches and emotional exhaustion. However, in terms of cynicism as an independent variable, Johnson and O’Leary-Kelly (2003) find that an employee’s inrole performance is negatively correlated (i.e., r ¼
0.21, po0.05) with (affective) organizational cynicism. Similarly, Brandes et al. (1999) find that both extra- and in-role behavior are negatively related to organizational cynicism. However, Johnson and O’Leary-Kelly (2003) find no linear relationship between cynicism (either affective or cognitive) and organizational citizenship behavior. Burnout Maslach and Leiter (1997) suggested that ‘‘burnout is the index of dislocation between what people are and what they have to doy(that) put(s) people into a downward spiral from which it is hard to recover (17). Maslach

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

241

(1982) has previously suggested that burnout comprises three components: ‘‘emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment (quoted in Demerouti et al., 2001, p. 499).’’ Many burnout studies focus on workers in helping occupations or those that have regular contact with the public, both of which constitute work contexts known for their high employee turnover. With regard to these three dimensions of burnout, emotional exhaustion is highly affective in nature and leads employees to feel ‘‘overextended and exhausted by the emotional demands of one’s work’’ (Maslach et al., 1996; Demerouti et al., 2001, p. 499). Maslach and Leiter (1997) also suggest that exhaustion may represent a response to the strain of work demands or big changes in work. The second component, depersonalization, implies an aloof attitude toward service or care recipients, characterized by an emotionally reserved approach toward the work and others on the job. Maslach and Leiter (1997, p. 18) go so far as to suggest that this distance may be an attempt by employees to ‘‘preserve oneself from exhaustion and disappointment.’’ In other words, burned out employees prefer to remain unaffected, for fear of having their expectations raised but later have their hopes dashed. Finally, burnout is characterized by a deep sense of loss regarding employees’ sense of accomplishment, such that employees ‘‘lose confidence in their ability to make a difference. And as they lose confidence in themselves, others lose confidence in them’’ (Maslach & Leiter, 1997, p. 18). In subsequent work, Demerouti et al. (2001) suggest that burnout requires two work conditions: high job demands and low levels of job resources. High job demands include highly physical workloads, time pressures, service recipient contacts, a physical environment, and shift work. High levels of these demands create exhaustion, which they define, similar to the emotional exhaustion concept offered by Maslach and colleagues, as resembling ‘‘traditional stress reactionsyincluding fatigue, job-related depression, psychosomatic complaints, and anxiety (Demerouti et al., 2001, p. 499).’’ At the same time, they suggest that jobs can be categorized by the amount of resources the workers receive, such as feedback, rewards, job control, participation, job security, and supervisory support. A lack of job resources produces the phenomenon of disengagement. Many scholars have also debated the dimensionality of burnout and its replicability across work contexts, national contexts, and time (e.g., Lee & Ashforth, 1990; Toppinen-Tanner, Kalimo, & Mutanen, 2002). However, even during this debate, the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) has been described as the ‘‘most widely adopted instrument to measure emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment components

242

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

of burnout’’ (Cordes, Dougherty, & Blum, 1997, p. 686). Most studies generally confirm the three-factor structure of the MBI across occupational groups and even national boundaries (Richardsen & Marinussen, 2004; Schutte, Toppinen, Kalimo, & Schaufeli, 2000; Schaufeli, Salanova, Gonzalez-Roma, & Bakker, 2002). Alternatively, the Oldenberg burnout inventory, according to Demerouti et al. (2001, p. 500), ‘‘covers not only affective, but also physical and cognitive aspects of exhaustion.’’ In other words, the burnout conceptualization by Maslach and colleagues focuses more on affective responses by those who experience burnout, whereas the Oldenburg conceptualization includes cognitive responses as well. Despite the general acceptance of the MBI, some studies suggest that burnout does not necessarily require all three parts and that personal accomplishment might be a consequence of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. For example, in summarizing their meta-analyses about the dimensionality of burnout, Lee and Ashforth (1996, p. 128) suggest their findings are ‘‘consistent with Leiter’s (1993) belief that personal accomplishment develops largely independently of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization.’’ Similarly, Koeske and Koeske (1989, p. 141) suggest that ‘‘exhaustion [is] the essence of burnout’’ and that their best model of burnout ‘‘treat[s] accomplishment and depersonalization as related variables – but not as elements of burnout.’’ Related to the dimensionality of burnout is the ordering of its aspects. For example, the Cherniss’ (1980) model represents burnout as a process in which elements of the work setting and aspects of the individual employee interact with stress sources, which are associated with different employee responses. Some employees’ responses to stress involve active problem solving, whereas others cope by exhibiting negative attitude changes (i.e., burnout) (Burke, 1987). That is, according to this model, burnout is a process of adjusting to and coping with sources of stress – note that stress precedes burnout. To test Cherniss’ model, Burke (1987) created a measure of stress that includes doubting one’s competence (akin to personal achievement in the MBI), difficulties with clients, interference by clients, lack of stimulation or fulfillment in one’s work, and lack of collegiality. In another test of the process model of burnout, Cordes et al. (1997) find that emotional exhaustion predicts depersonalization (which they relate to punishment), which is negatively related to personal accomplishment. They also find a significant direct path between emotional exhaustion and personal accomplishment (
0.24 path coefficient). This investigation of the ordering of burnout’s aspects also drives examinations into the relative importance of its personal and situational factors,

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

243

which can provide a better understanding of the means by which it may be affected. Research that uses the MBI subscribes to the view that burnout is largely a social/organizational phenomenon, in contrast to the ‘‘medically driven’’ model of burnout that tends to fault the employee for his or her own burnout (Meyerson, 1994). For example, Meyerson (1994, p. 643), in interviews with social workers at five different hospitals, finds that if someone were to have become burned out, employees would often suggest that the individual had a ‘‘personal character flaw.’’ Burke (1987, p. 176), however, suggests that though there are ‘‘few significant and consistent personality correlates of burnouty[there are] many significant and consistent job, work setting, and organizational correlations of burnout.’’ Accordingly, Maslach and Leiter (1997) vehemently deny the idea that burnout is ‘‘a psychiatric disorder that is amenable to individual treatment approaches’’ (p. 33) and instead propose that ‘‘the sources of burnout are more situational than personal, so solutions to the problem need to be sought within the social context of the workplace’’ (p. 79). However, even beyond personal versus situational factors, several different theories abound regarding the antecedents to burnout. Maslach and Leiter (1997) suggest six sources, all of which originate with the organization. Other scholars suggest a social etiology. For example, Bakker, Demerouti, and Schaufeli (2003) believe burnout may be socially induced, whereas Meyerson (1994) offers a conception in which burnout is socially produced and experienced. Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) imply that burnout correlates positively with job demands, health problems, and turnover, but negatively with job resources and engagement. Similarly, Lee and Ashforth (1996) find in their meta-analysis that emotional exhaustion relates positively to job stressors such as job demands and turnover intent, and negatively to support in the form of resources, opportunities for job enhancement, coping, and organizational commitment. In addition, they relate the depersonalization component to burnout in a similar fashion but find it negatively related to job satisfaction. Finally, as further evidence in support of the idea that personal accomplishment may not be an inherent part of burnout, Lee and Ashforth (1996) find that personal accomplishments relate to rewards, turnover intent, control coping, and social support but not to job demand stressors. Regardless of why they experience burnout, the way in which employees cognitively construct situations may be important in terms of their ability to ameliorate burnout. Recent research on proposed antidotes to burnout include Ashforth and Lee (1997) and Lee and Ashforth (1993), which advocate that workers study ‘‘cognitive frames’’ that encourage employees to

244

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

‘‘keep issues in perspective, avoid taking issues personally, [and be] satisfied with your best’’ (1997, p. 706) to reduce the damaging effects of burnout. Unfortunately, burnout has been more commonly associated with negative individual and organizational outcomes. In terms of individual-level consequences, Burke (1987) finds that burnout among police officers relates positively to psychosomatic symptoms, more negative states, more work– nonwork conflict, more alcohol consumption, more smoking, less exercise, more days lost to illness, and more medication consumption. Maslach and Leiter (1997, p. 19) also suggest that burnout is associated with other physical problems, including headaches, gastrointestinal illnesses, high blood pressure, muscle tension, and chronic fatigue. In terms of organizational outcomes, burnout is strongly negatively related to self-reported job satisfaction and more intent to turnover (Burke, 1987). Similarly, Cropanzano, Rupp, and Byrne (2003) find that emotional exhaustion is related negatively to organizational commitment and variations of organizational citizenship behavior but positively to turnover intentions and job performance. In addition, exhaustion correlates with depersonalization and reduced personal accomplishment, which also are related to psychological withdrawal and turnover intentions (Lee & Ashforth, 1993). Thus, in our comparison between organizational cynicism and burnout, several differences become apparent. First, though burnout generally includes a component called ‘‘depersonalization,’’ which Maslach and others have referred to as ‘‘cynicism,’’ we argue that there are significant differences in these concepts. Both concepts may be characterized by a sneering contempt of others, but organizational cynicism refers to negative attitudes toward the employing organization, not toward clients or recipients of an employee’s service. Rather, the common target for organizational cynicism remains the senior leadership of the employing organization (Andersson & Bateman, 1997; Dean et al., 1998; Wanous, Reichers, & Austin, 2000), often because changes in company direction, strategies, or policies may make it difficult for employees to serve the very customers they are expected to assist. Employees that are organizationally cynical may retain high occupational commitment, whereas burned out employees question not only their ability to work effectively within their chosen occupation, but also the worth of their occupation in general. In terms of affect, both cynicism and burnout share the notions of disappointment and frustration. However, the target of the negative emotions in a burnout situation may include colleagues and even the self, whereas for organizational cynicism, the target remains the organization or the company’s top management. As evidence that both these concepts involve negative

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

245

feelings, albeit different targets, Johnson and O’Leary-Kelly (2003, p. 640) find that (affective) organizational cynicism predicts the emotional exhaustion subscale of the MBI. Behaviorally, burnout often is characterized by employees’ withdrawal from organizational life, whereas employees who are more organizationally cynical may take a more defensive stance, verbally opposing organizational action and mocking organizational initiatives publicly (Dean et al., 1998). In addition, the outcomes associated with burnout are usually deleterious whereas we will argue more later, that cynicism may actually have some positive aspects.

Stress According to Selye (1964), stress is an inevitable consequence of living. However, in the contemporary workplace, the ubiquity of the experience of stress appears to affect organizational life in immense proportions (LeFevre, Matheny, & Kolt, 2003). Landsbergis and Vivona-Vaughn (1995) find from their analysis of several studies that the cost of stress-related illness is more than $100 billion annually. Within academia, a variety of disciplines have studied the concept of stress, from medicine to psychology to organizational behavior. Perhaps because of such diversity in the research foci, the term ‘‘stress’’ has been defined and used in different ways. According to Koslowsky (1998, p. 1), research has tended to define stress ‘‘not only as stimulus, but as a process that links variables inside and outside the individual, to produce a reaction that is psychologically, and often, physiologically debilitating.’’ However, according to Jex, Beehr, and Roberts (1992), nearly 14% of the articles they reviewed contained incorrect or ambiguous uses of the term ‘‘stress.’’ Although Selye (1964) first used the term to describe a set of physiological and psychological responses to adverse conditions, it eventually came to be used by scholars in a variety of ways. Following Selye (1964), one stream of research focuses on the physiological reactions of individuals to environmental stressors (LeFevre et al., 2003; Code & Langan-Fox, 2001). Often considered the response definition of stress (Jex et al., 1992), this conception overlaps with the concept of strain. Others employ the stimulus definition (Beehr, Walsh, & Taber, 1976; Jex et al., 1992), in which stress refers to the external environmental features that determine a person’s adaptive response. Still others regard it as a process, in which the stress experience depends on an individual level of cognition of environmental demands/ stressors, as well as the appraisal of individual coping mechanisms (Perrewe´ & Zellers, 1999). Some have used stress as a blanket term to indicate the

246

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

entire process of external influence, appraisal, reaction, and its results (Deary et al., 1996). After conducting a study to interpret the meaning of the word, Jex et al. (1992) concluded that stress is something experienced and felt by persons, which means there is an affective dimension to it. Following him, we locate stress as the subjective (affective) experience of a person in the workplace that emerges out of his or her cognition of stressors and engenders individual reactions. Key antecedents identified in extant literature for occupational stress comprise both external environmental and internal individual levels. Following Kets de Vries (1979), they can be categorized as organizational design variables, interpersonal variables, and career variables. The key organizational variables include environmental demands on the person’s resources, the level of ambiguity and role conflict, the level of control, the physical environment, the incentive system, and the level of work overload. Interpersonal variables include leadership styles, group factors, and lack of participation; the career variables include occupational level, stage of career in the organization, and stagnation. Those scholars that attribute the antecedents of stress more to the individual cognition process (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Perrewe´ et al., 1999) show that stress does not work on everyone in the same way. Rather, it is a subjective individual experience that emanates from not only the appraisal of environmental demands but also the person’s ability to deal or cope with those demands. Coping has remained a key feature of the stress literature. Studies show that coping mechanisms can reduce the intensity of stress experiences, thereby minimizing the deleterious effects of stress. According to Zaccaro and Riley (1987), coping attempts to overcome the threat or meet the challenge and prevent strain. Such coping, according to Quick and Quick (1984), occurs at three levels. The first is stressor directed, and persons manage their personal perceptions of stress, their lifestyle, and their personal environment. During the second, response-directed level, the person engages in various forms of relaxation and emotional outlets to manage his or her responses. Finally, the symptom-directed level involves persons seeking counseling, therapy, and medical care to deal with the symptoms of stress. In addition, stress literature is strewn with studies that demonstrate how different behaviors and abilities enable people to cope more effectively. These behaviors include political skills (Perrewe´ et al., 2004), self-efficacy (Schaubroeck & Merrit, 1997), negative affect (Kassel, Stroud, & Paronis, 2003), alcohol consumption, positive reinterpretation (Begley, 1998), and so forth. Thus, stress remains a relatively ubiquitous phenomenon, the experience of which can be adjusted in terms of its intensity.

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

247

The large body of research on the outcomes of stress experiences focuses variously on physiological outcomes (e.g., raised blood pressure, increased cholesterol, lowered immunity), psychological effects (e.g., sleep disturbances, panic attacks, anxiety, restlessness), work behavior (e.g., performance, turnover, job search), and work attitudes (e.g., job satisfaction, intention to quit, withdrawal) (Kets de Vries, 1979). Some researchers also have discussed the outcomes of stress differentially according to good and bad stress, defined as challenge- and hindrance-related stress, respectively. Good stress, or eustress, engenders positive outcomes (e.g., greater loyalty, less job search, lower intention to quit), whereas bad stress results in more negative outcomes (e.g., higher strain, lower job satisfaction, job tensions, turnover intentions, absenteeism) (Boswell, Olson-Buchanan, & LePine, 2004; Schaubroeck, Cotton, & Jennings, 1989). Several other studies have considered various individual-, group-, and organizational-level moderators (for a review, see Sullivan & Bhagat, 1992), such as social support, sense of competence, locus of control, Type A personality, tolerance for ambiguity, group cohesiveness, and so on. The relationship between stress and performance also has been controversial, largely because two different, competing hypotheses have received support in different studies. The first classical hypothesis (Yerkes-Dobson Law, 1908) postulates that stress has an inverted U-shaped relationship with performance: At lower levels of stress, people do not face any challenges and are not motivated to work, and at very high levels of stress, they find it difficult to work. This view has not been supported consistently, but it continues in use mostly because of its intuitive appeal, not any empirical evidence (Sullivan & Bhagat, 1992; Zaccaro & Riley, 1987). However, there is more consensus among researchers regarding the competing hypothesis, which posits that stress has a negative impact on performance (Westman & Eden, 1992; Zaccaro & Riley, 1987). It argues that people with high stress spend more time coping or indulge in undesirable behaviors, such as sabotage or time wasting (Sullivan & Bhagat, 1992), which leads to lower performance. Several studies support this relationship in different occupational groups (Jamal, 1984, 1985). However, many results have been driven by the specific measures used to assess both stress and performance and not between the two constructs per se (Rabinowitz & Stumpf, 1987). A spate of studies also shows that the otherwise linear relationship between stress and performance may be affected by a host of mediating and moderating factors, such as the stress experienced by the supervisor (Potter & Fiedler, 1981), individual differences (Baker, Ware, Spires, & Osborn, 1966), commitment (Jamal, 1984, 1985), and the nature of

248

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

emotions (Motowildo, Packard, & Manning, 1986). Thus, the relationship between stress and performance remains complex and a terrain of many conceptual and empirical contradictions (Koslowsky, 1998). Similar to other elements of the literature, stress has been measured in many different ways. In general, these ways can be divided into two broad categories: objective and self-reported (Fried, Rowland, & Ferris, 1984). With the objective method, researchers have used physiological measures, such as cardiology, biochemical, and gastrointestinal symptoms (Fried et al., 1984). Self-reported dimensions of perceived stress at work, in contrast, employ scales such as the work environment scale (Moos, 1982), job stress survey (Spielberger & Reheiser, 1994), human factors inventory (Jones & Dubois, 1987), Barnett job experience scale (Barnett et al., 1993), and even some dimensions of the MBI (Martocchio & O’Leary, 1989). Most such scales attempt to seek different aspects of the work life that may be determinants of stress, as well as the experience of stress. They include aspects of the task, employees’ perceptions of stress, level of involvement, cohesion and support experienced, autonomy, level of risk, work pressure, physical comfort, job demands, and so forth. Finally, the definition and use of stress remains controversial in terms of its domains. According to Jex et al. (1992), the experience of stress should be designated an affective phenomenon – persons ‘‘feel’’ stress. In contrast, Perrewe´ et al. (1999) argue that stress contains both cognitive and affective dimensions. Comparing stress and cynicism, we note that both constructs have cognitive and affective dimensions. Moreover, both occupational stress and organizational cynicism supposedly entail negative experiences/reactions that people develop in organizations and are very common phenomena in contemporary organizations (Kanter & Mirvis, 1989; Sullivan & Bhagat, 1992). However, in addition to the affective and cognitive components, cynicism also contains a behavioral dimension (Dean et al., 1998). The two constructs also differ in their antecedents and consequences. Whereas cynicism has been proposed to have some negative effects on work outcomes, stress is often associated with a deleterious impact on the physiological, psychological, and work attitudes and outcomes of those undergoing it. We will argue that cynical behavior may act as a coping mechanism for dealing with stress; thus, not only are the two constructs different, but one can also be employed to counteract the impact of the other. Antisocial Behavior Antisocial behavior represents a category of employee behaviors that have the potential to cause harm (Robinson & O’Leary-Kelly, 1998). The term

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

249

was developed by Robinson and O’Leary-Kelly (1998) to capture a wide range of behaviors, including theft, property damage, aggression and violence, rudeness/incivility, breaking rules with intent to harm, and criticism. Antisocial literature relates closely to the broader body of deviance literature (Greenberg, 1990; Robinson & Bennett, 1995), which defines organizational deviance as ‘‘voluntary behavior that violates significant organizational norms, and in doing so threatens the well-being of the organization, its members, or both’’ (Robinson & Bennett, 1995, p. 556). The antecedents for antisocial behavior can be traced to individual, group, and environmental factors. According to O’Leary-Kelly, Griffin, and Glew (1996), individual-level aggressions at work are often caused by experiences outside of work, such as family, peer group, school, and other cultural interactions. At the group level, antisocial behavior may be determined by the antisocial climate of the group, the length of membership of an individual in the group, or the level of task interdependence in the group (Robinson & O’Leary-Kelly, 1998). At the environmental level, such behaviors may be caused by the type of role models, the continued experience of aversive treatment or perceived injustice, incentives that encourage aggressive behavior, and factors in the physical environment (Andersson & Pearson, 1999; Greenberg, 1990). The consequences of such antisocial behavior are tremendous. For example, employee theft is a huge problem facing organizations (GomezMejia, Balkin, & Cardy, 2004), and other antisocial behaviors, such as employee violence and incivility, are on the rise (Pearson & Porath, 2005). The main impact of such behavior is that it spirals and intensifies, which leads to the demise of the workplace culture (Pearson & Porath, 2005). Scholars have suggested that management must have effective practices in place to deal with these behaviors, such as hiring the right people, using monitoring mechanisms, being aware of possible problems, and preventing injustice toward employees (O’Leary-Kelly et al., 1996; Robinson & Bennett, 1995). Because antisocial behavior as a field of research is a relatively new area, few studies have examined its components empirically. Robinson and O’Leary-Kelly (1998) measure individual antisocial behavior with a scale that assesses property damage, harm to someone at work, poor work performance, and so on. Specific aspects of antisocial behavior have also been measured in several different ways. Greenberg (1990) measures theft as the value of shrinkage in a manufacturing plant over time. Other researchers (e.g., Andersson & Pearson, 1999; O’Leary-Kelly et al., 1996) suggest the use of various types of self-reports, including a critical incident-type survey that may uncover different types of antisocial behavior.

250

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

With regard to the commonalities between antisocial behavior and cynicism, both entail negative expressions in the workplace in the form of criticism. However, the significant difference between the two constructs is that antisocial behavior has the potential to harm the organization directly, as manifested in various forms – property damage, theft, aggression, violence, rudeness, and so on. In contrast, cynical behavior has much less potential to cause direct harm. Again, whereas antisocial behavior is essentially a behavioral construct, cynicism can occur at both cognitive and affective levels, along with behavioral expression. Thus, the two constructs, though similar in certain dimensions, are also largely different and capture different phenomena in the workplace.

EXPLORING BEHAVIORAL CYNICISM In this section, we outline the two forms of cynicism and then develop some testable propositions. We return to the concept of cynical behavior proposed by Dean et al. (1998). In addition to the cognitive and affective dimensions of organizational cynicism, the behavioral dimension, largely ignored by research, represents an important aspect of cynicism that possesses its own specific relationships to organizational outcomes. That is, though many seemingly ‘‘anti-organization’’ constructs have been proposed to have negative consequences for organizations, we suggest that some behavioral aspects of cynicism may provide positive consequences that have not been considered previously. Specifically, we theorize that behavioral cynicism may have positive effects on the organization because it serves as an employee coping mechanism. In addition, we believe there are two aspects of cynical behavior: cynical humor and cynical criticism.

Cynical Humor Humor has long been suggested as an intrinsic part of expressing cynicism (Dean et al., 1998). Extant literature on workplace humor notes the many benefits that ‘‘speaking out’’ engenders, sometimes consciously, sometimes unconsciously. According to Barsoux (1996, p. 501), managers often use humor to ‘‘break the ice’’ and open communication channels. Others show how humor increases group cohesiveness, reinforces power relations in a nondisturbing way, and enhances interpersonal communication among peers (Duncan, Smeltzer, & Leap, 1990).

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

251

However, cynical humor differs from humorous behavior in general. Cynical humor involves employees who decide to mock the company slogans, caricature the top management’s pet programs, and so on (Dean et al., 1998). This form of behavior is directed mainly against the organization in general or top management in particular. Extant literature on cynicism shows that cynical humor makes employees feel freer and less constrained by organizational forces (Fleming & Spicer, 2003). In addition, cynical humor may be a way to disarm verbal combatants, which allows for more candid opinions from colleagues (Barsoux, 1996). Indeed, cynical humor may help employees deal with organizational confusion, bring attention to their pressing needs, start real discussions, cope with disorder, and engage in divergent thinking (Barsoux, 1996). For items used by Brandes (1997) to measure cynical humor, refer to the appendix. Cynical Criticism In terms of the definition of behavioral cynicism offered by Dean et al. (1998), cynical employees make strong criticisms of the organization. We suggest that there is a second variant of behavioral cynicism, namely, cynical criticism. Cynical criticisms, though aimed at the organization, are not necessarily meant to be funny. Because these criticisms lack humor, they also lack the temporary distancing that allows employees to blow off steam or gain a new perspective, thus making their critiques seem like a form of self-righteous attack on organizational strategies and decision makers. Whereas cynical humor permits divergent thinking, cynical criticisms are often associated with a sense of learned helplessness, the sense that ‘‘nothing can be done, because we’ve tried it all before.’’ Socially, cynical criticism tends to reinforce hopelessness but do little to reinforce cohesion among peers. The constant pessimism inherent in cynical criticism can spread as a malaise within groups and undermine work relationships (Kanter & Mirvis, 1989). In addition, organizationally cynical people who are relentlessly skeptical about every organizational action may not only miss positive opportunities but also chase away colleagues who could help the cynic perform his or her job. For items used by Brandes (1997) to measure cynical criticism, refer to the appendix.

RESEARCH PROPOSITIONS Having laid the groundwork for how organizational cynicism differs from other constructs (e.g., burnout, stress, antisocial behavior) and expanded our

252

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

notions of the manifestations of behavioral cynicism, we now offer several research propositions that we hope others scholars might study empirically in the future. Because it represents a fairly negative-sounding construct, we initially might assume that cynicism will have few if any positive organizational consequences, as the budding empirical work in the area seems to support. For example, Johnson and O’Leary-Kelly (2003) find that affective cynicism is negatively and linearly related to employees’ in-role performance. However, we believe that exploring solely linear relationships can be limiting and create difficulties in making any generalizations about reality. Non-Linear Relations Most organizational theories tend to rely on the linearity assumption of their data largely to maintain theoretical parsimony and robustness in tests. However, such emphasis has been said to be an ‘‘unintentional conspiracy of y (contemporary organizational) theory and method’’ and not a ‘‘reflection of reality’’ (Ferris, Bowen, Hochwarter, Hall, & Perrewe´, 2005). In other words, scholars’ assumptions regarding the linear relationships between constructs may ignore the finer distinctions between high, moderate, and low levels of the construct in question. This oversight is particularly an issue for complex or ambiguous employee attitudes and responses. For example, Fugate, Kinicki, and Scheck (2002) indicate that employee responses to workforce restructurings include not only linear but also quadratic and cubic trends. Similarly, some research suggests that employee productivity under increased job insecurity (often characteristic of downsized firms) follows an inverted-U relationship, such that both high and low levels of job insecurity are associated with low productivity (Brockner, Tyler, & Cooper-Schneider, 1992). In addition, several studies on the performance to voluntary turnover/ turnover intention relationships, including a meta-analysis by Williams and Livingstone (1994) found a non-linear trend (Mossholder, Bedeian, Norris, Giles, & Feild, 1988; Jackofsky, Ferris, & Breckenridge, 1986). If we were to test only for a negative, linear main effect of cynicism, we might miss other forms of the nature of the relationship that predict performance better. For example, if we find a negative linear relationship but neglect adding a squared term that contributes additional variance beyond the linear term within the equation, we would miss the actual nature of the relationship, that is, a function that decreases but at a decreasing rate across increased levels of the independent variable (e.g., Aiken & West, 1991). Similarly, if we were to find no linear relationship between cynicism and extra-role performance and therefore call our analysis complete, we may have neglected

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

253

the possibility of a significant non-linear relationship characterized by a U- or inverted U-shaped relationship by failing to include a squared term. Thus in this paper, we theoretically explore the possibility of a non-linear relationship between the different aspects of cynical behavior and performance. Positive Effects of Cynical Behavior on Performance At first, cynical employees might be imagined as nothing more than critical ‘‘naysayers’’ who always have an explanation for why something cannot be done. For example, in the context of job layoffs, Mishra and Spreitzer (1998) find that cynical employees are vocal and will face the company head on with critiques that take the form of active, destructive responses against the organization. However, Cutler (2000, p. 295) suggests that cynics could be ‘‘positive and optimistic force[s] for change,’’ not merely sneering faultfinders. Cutler further suggests that cynical employees may actually ‘‘accept responsibility for their own actions [by working] tirelessly at what they do’’ (2000, p. 310), which implies that cynicism may have a positive effect on performance. Despite cynical employees’ seeming pessimism, Reichers, Wanous, and Austin (1997, p. 52) find that even among ‘‘highly cynical’’ employees, 53% indicated they ‘‘were willing to keep on trying to make change.’’ As further support, Meyerson (1990, p. 303) finds that ‘‘ysome of the more expressly cynical social workers I studied were also among the most concerned and hopeful.’’ In summary, it may be that cynical employees, though unwilling to follow organizational mandates unquestioningly, have an experienced, critical eye that could be a force for change if used properly. In other words, cynical employees may be ‘‘closet idealists’’ who yearn for improvement but become disillusioned with the who, how, and what associated with organizational strategies and directions. Organizationally cynical employees could also serve important roles as the ‘‘devil’s advocates,’’ who question the assumptions and strategies needed to bring a declining organization back to prominence (Cutler, 2000; Fleming & Spicer, 2003). The manager who espouses a cynical perspective makes others question the taken-for-granted aspects of work life; in turn, cynical employees work better because of the insights they have gained into their work through critical analysis (e.g., Cutler, 2000). The constant questioning and lack of acceptance of company programs by organizational cynics even may be associated with greater productivity (Cutler, 2000; Fleming & Spicer, 2003). Cynical employees can also serve as important reality checks on organizational action. For example, Andersson and Bateman (1997) find that cynicism about an employer and its senior staff corresponds to

254

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

employees’ nonconformance with requests by their employer to engage in unethical behavior. In this way, cynical employees could ‘‘act as the voice of conscience for the organization’’ and ensure that others in the organization avoid ‘‘the temptation to assume that self-interested or underhanded behavior may go undetected’’ (Dean et al., 1998, p. 347). Cynical Humor and Employee In-Role Performance Although we believe cynical humor generally will be associated with increased in-role performance, the relationship is unlikely to be linear. Whereas some ability to speak frankly and humorously about organizational issues and problems provides a useful means for employees to express their confusion, continued increases in the expression of humor may be associated with marginally declining returns. That is, cynical humor generally will be associated with better performance, but after a certain point, cynical humor is no longer quite as funny, and the temporary distancing and perspective gained from that cynically humorous behavior, which enabled the employees to gain insight into organizational issues, eventually will be associated with no further gains in scale. Proposition 1. Cynical humor will be related positively to employee inrole performance at a decreasing rate. Cynical Criticism and Employee In-Role Performance Even cynical criticisms can help bring about positive changes in employees’ performance – but only up to a point. For example, Fleming and Spicer (2003) postulate that employees sometimes perform better when they disidentify with organizations and perform worse with excessive identification. Disidentification implies a brief vacation from the confines of conventional thinking, which provides the chance to think about organizational issues from a different perspective. Low levels of disidentification may indicate an employee’s willingness to maintain the status quo and unquestioningly support the company’s actions, but these goals may not necessarily be related to better performance. More moderate levels of disidentification can be associated with the functional problem solving and innovation that are associated with better in-role performance. However, excessive disidentification with the organization can breed contempt. When taken to the extreme, cynical criticisms may cause the social isolation of the organizationally cynical employee, leading to decreases in

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

255

job performance. For example, Anne Fisher, a career advice columnist at Fortune magazine, poignantly responded to a reader who suggested that she had been passed over for promotion by management who described her behavior as ‘‘too negative’’ and ‘‘not willing to go with the flow’’ when changes were introduced. Noting that employees who are consistently negative are likely to be passed over for promotions, Fisher (2002) advised the employee to read Waldroop and Butler (2001), who suggest that bad habits like chronic pessimism can lead to career derailment, because If you’re usually the one who leads the crusade against new ideas (especially if you’re the only crusader), you may be in danger. Even if you perceive yourself not as a pessimist but rather as a hard-nosed realistytake a second look. Perhaps instead of worrying about possible changes [in the organization], you should begin worrying about the effects of your negativity on your career. (quoted in Fisher, 2002, p. 130)

Similarly, one of Meyerson’s (1990, p. 303) interviewees pointed out that this second form of cynicism can become ‘‘deleterious’’ and is marked by ‘‘selfdefeat, resignation, and apathy.’’ Whereas the jokes of the cynical humorist may contain a hint of constructive criticism, regular, excessively critical critiques may lead to the perception of the criticizer as ‘‘the office crab’’ (Fisher, 2002). When such employees can no longer find anything positive to say about the organizational environment or management’s plans, they may miss out on opportunities that affect their own in-role performance. Work colleagues may socially isolate cynically critical employees in an attempt to avoid excessive negativity that might keep them from performing their own in-role duties effectively. This social isolation also may decrease the cynical critic’s in-role performance, particularly as he or she provides more frequent criticisms. Consequently, we propose an inverted U-shaped relationship between cynical criticism and employee in-role performance. Proposition 2. Cynical criticism will be nonlinearly related to employee in-role performance, such that low and high levels of cynical criticism will be related to lower in-role performance and that moderate levels of cynical criticism will be associated with greater in-role performance. Stress, Cynicism, and Work Outcomes: Behavioral Cynicism as a Moderator A vast literature pertains to those coping mechanisms typically employed to reduce the experience of stress in the workplace (Cartwright & Cooper, 1996). Many mechanisms also act as moderators in the stress–performance relationship, such as employee personality (Baker et al., 1966), stress experienced

256

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

by the supervisor (Potter & Fiedler, 1981), and organizational commitment (Jamal, 1984, 1985). We now explore how cynical behavior may similarly moderate the relationship between stress and performance. Specifically, we investigate how cynical humor and cynical criticism might act as coping mechanisms and intervene in the stress to performance relationship. In her comments regarding the study of negative emotional expressions, Meyerson (1990) suggests that researchers often focus on ‘‘socially desirable emotions.’’ A cursory review of the many publications about attitudes and emotions in management research show a preponderance of articles on positive organizational outcomes and attitudes, such as organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Yet only in recent years has an emerging niche of research focused on topics like antisocial behavior (e.g., Robinson & O’Leary-Kelly, 1998) and incivility (e.g., Andersson & Pearson, 1999), though such behaviors undoubtedly remain standard operating procedures in many organizations. Meyerson (1990) also suggests that dominant research methodologies studying positive work attitudes (i.e., one-time questionnaires and surveys) partially drive this overemphasis on positive emotions, so as to exclude or ignore less socially desirable ones. In reflecting on her own work, she implies that it was not until she used more invasive, regular observations, and interviewing techniques that she came to realize the importance of understudied emotions, including ambiguity and its related concepts such as confusion, ambivalence, and even cynicism (Meyerson, 1990, p. 296). Through her extended observation of social workers, Meyerson (1990, p. 301) came to appreciate how cynicism may serve as in important coping mechanism that permits the ‘‘emotional expression of ambiguity’’ that ‘‘grow[s] out of felt contradictions, such as simultaneous feelings of enthusiasm and frustration, idealism and realism, or hope and hopelessness.’’ One social worker even noted, we keep getting mixed messages about everything. But you know, I have a fairly good sense of humor, a bit on the cynical side. I’m sort of able to sit back and say there are a lot of difficulties in working in a big organization like this. So we just laugh about the absurdity of this place as much as we can. We may seem warped at times, but it’s just our way. (Meyerson, 1990, p. 302)

In summarizing the work of others, Fleming and Spicer (2003, p. 159) indicate that highly cynical employees may ‘‘voice statements of disbelief about the official culturey[and be] rather jaundiced-eyed toward managerial exhortations.’’ In other words, organizational cynics may be unwilling to walk the party line uncritically and more likely to proclaim that the ‘‘Emperor has no clothes.’’ In addition, organizational cynics may be less willing

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

257

to go along with organizational ambiguities, inconsistencies, and/or hypocrisy unquestioningly. For example, managerial exhortations about the latest management fad (e.g., total quality management, empowerment) are frequent targets for employees’ cynical behavior, often because such management innovations tend to be marked by contradictions and ambiguity not only in practice but also in their overall worth. One middle manager, for example, noticed a colleague’s withering potted plant and remarked, ‘‘It must have been empowered’’ (Barsoux, 1996, p. 503). Implicit within this critique is the often-neglected downside of empowerment: more employee responsibility, little training in additional responsibilities, and few additional resources to support these increasing responsibilities. These changes eventually can lead to the exhaustion, or wilting of the newly ‘‘empowered’’ employees. Thus, cynical behavior, in the forms of cynical critiques and humor, may serve as an essential ‘‘safety valve’’ that permits groups to let off the steam that results from their frustrations over work ambiguities or inconsistencies. Consistent with Meyerson, we suggest that behavioral cynicism can be ‘‘a [healthful] way of expressing frustration and relinquishing responsibility for aspects of a situation that are beyond control without renouncing all hope’’ (Meyerson, 1990, p. 303). Unlike those members of the crowd who have gathered to see the Emperor in his beautiful new clothes but are afraid to mention his nakedness aloud, behaviorally cynical employees may feel compelled to speak when others will not. Organizationally cynical persons may voice opinions that ‘‘crystallize a sentiment privately harbored by others. Thus a [cynical] joker voices underlying frustrations, anxieties, or conflicts, which expressed differently, might indicate a lack of commitment, loyalty, or team spirit’’ (Barsoux, 1996, p. 502). In this way, cynical humor may subvert power structures, even if temporarily, and provide a form of catharsis (Westwood, 2004). Often, the role of cynic may emerge within groups. Meyerson (1990) observes that the cynical employee plays an important role within each work unit. In one group of social workers she studied, the behavior of the cynic, ‘‘Len,’’ led ‘‘some workers to refer to [him] as an annoyance and a deviant, but their appreciation for him – or the function that he served – was also evident’’ (Meyerson, 1990, p. 303). One coworker who reflected on Len’s informal role as the ‘‘group cynic’’ suggested that if [he] didn’t do it, somebody else would do it. I think every group has to have a way to let off some steam and this case it’s probably through Len. I think the group is using Len as a release valve. (Meyerson, 1990, p. 303)

Meyerson (1990) also indicates that many social workers in her study regarded cynical employees as having ‘‘a bad attitude,’’ yet ‘‘ymany of these

258

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

same individuals seemed to encourage cynicism when they were in group settings, particularly informal ones’’ (p. 303). From this experience, she concluded ‘‘that many of the members actually experienced the cynicism, but few were willing to express it’’ (Meyerson, 1990, p. 303). In the next section we explore the differential impact that the two dimensions of cynical behavior – namely, cynical humor, and cynical criticism – exert on the stress to performance relationship. The stress to performance relationship is in itself contentious (Ferris et al., 2005; Sullivan & Bhagat, 1992), with many questions around the linearity or the non-linearity of the nature of the relationship. Though there is a continued intuitive appeal of the non-linear relationship, there is more empirical evidence about the negative-linear hypothesis (Sullivan & Bhagat, 1992). Yet the findings have also been attributed to the specific measures used rather than the established relationship between the two constructs (Rabinowitz & Stumpf, 1987). In spite of contradictions about this relationship, in general there is both intuitive and empirical consensus on the fact that under conditions of high stress there is lowered performance. Given this ongoing debate in the field of stress, we set boundaries to our theoretical model. Here, we focus exclusively on the moderation of the different dimensions of cynicism to the relationship between stress and performance under conditions of high stress only. Cynical Humor: Moderator of the Stress–Performance Relationship Freud (1960) suggested humor as a key defense mechanism that people employ. Since then, several studies have shown that humor provides a coping mechanism for a variety of negative experiences, including stress (Westwood, 2004; Yovetich, Dale, & Hudak, 1990), and conceptualized it as an emotional outlet, or a safety valve (Martin & Lefcourt, 1983). We propose that cynical humor, above and beyond general humor, makes an effective coping mechanism especially in organizational contexts for several reasons. First, cynicism enables a person to be critical and suspicious of his or her surroundings. In this way, cynics can keep their minds free by disidentifying with the organization (Fleming & Spicer, 2003). This disidentification in turn helps them question the stressors in the environment, thereby reducing perceptions of stress. Second, cynical humorists may serve an important role within groups (e.g., Meyerson, 1990). By subverting power structures, cynical humor may lead, however temporarily, to a form of catharsis (Westwood, 2004). By voicing opinions that others harbor privately, cynical jokers safely and publicly express various anxieties and conflicts and thereby help employees deal better with the confusions and tensions of work (Barsoux, 1996). This assistance

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

259

makes cynical humorists more popular and generates greater social support for them among their anxious colleagues. In summary, their humor can act as an effective antidote to both their own stress and that of others. Third, cynical humor may prevent people from falling into a cycle of depression, which is a common outcome of stress that leads to lowered performance (Motowildo et al., 1986). In this way, cynical humor can help people cope better at both the primary (i.e., how you perceive the situation) and the secondary levels (i.e., how do you emotionally react to the situation) (Zaccaro & Riley, 1987) and can be regarded as an active behavioral method of coping (Cartwright & Cooper, 1996). Persons who express cynical humor more will be better able to keep a free mind while gaining more social support. In this way, employees who express cynical humor perform better than those who cannot express their concerns about their stress experiences or those who express stress in an inappropriate way that does not contain the popular appeal of humor or its non-threatening appearance. Proposition 3. Cynical humor will moderate the negative relationship between stress and performance, such that under conditions of high stress, more cynically humorous behavior will reduce the strength of this relationship. Cynical Criticism: Moderator of the Stress–Performance Relationship In a second aspect of cynical behavior, Dean et al. (1998), suggest that employees express negative sentiments about the workplace without the element of humor. To a certain extent, this cynical criticism can be helpful. Just like cynical humor, cynical criticism reflects a disidentification with the organization (Fleming & Spicer, 2003) and provides a release for both the cynic and the cynics’ coworkers or group, just as Len’s criticism functioned for the group of social workers described by Meyerson (1990). However, when such behavior is manifested consistently, it loses its safety valve effect because pure criticism lacks the positive element of hope and/or irony that humor provides. Therefore, ongoing criticism may lead to feelings of apathy and self-defeat, become ‘‘deleterious’’ (Meyerson, 1990), and eventually cause the alienation of fellow group members, who will largely turn to more positive coping mechanisms. In this way, cynical critics may lose social support, which represents an important means to deal with stress. Their constantly negative remarks also may make them more depressed and lower their in-role performance (Motowildo et al., 1986). Thus, criticism becomes an ineffective coping behavior when it is used repeatedly and thereby leads to

260

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

lowered performance. We propose that the stress–performance relationship is moderated by cynical criticism in such a way that a high level of cynical criticism strengthens the negative relationship between stress and performance, whereas low levels of critical cynicism minimize the same negative relationship. Proposition 4. Cynical criticism will moderate the negative relationship between stress and performance, such that in conditions of high stress, more cynical criticism will increase the strength of this relationship.

CONCLUSION We believe that cynical humor can play an important role in organizational life. Specifically, employees who can distance themselves temporarily from the ambiguities and frustrations of organizational life through behavioral cynicism may obtain greater insight into work problems and even be among the organization’s better performers. In short bursts, employees’ cynical humor subverts standard operating procedures and hierarchies in a healthful, short-term manner that can help colleagues not take themselves or their circumstances too seriously. By being able to laugh with colleagues about the inconsistencies between organizational proclamations and deeds, cynical humorists also can serve as sources of social support. Similarly, employees that use cynical humor may take the stress off others by saying the things that others may be too afraid to suggest. Furthermore, though workgroup peers may not condone the cynic’s behavior around supervisors (or researchers, for that matter!), they might encourage clandestine humor (Meyerson, 1990). In contrast, cynical criticisms, when taken too far, not only can keep the critic from perceiving work opportunities but also eventually may lead to social isolation from others who do not appreciate the employee’s constant negativity. Such critiques about the organization also can become too personal or cut too close to the quick. An employee who makes criticisms in moderation, however, may have enough experience and perspective to note problems and inconsistencies in organizational functions and aspects, which could help other employees to fix problems and lead to better in-role performance. But those employees who are constantly critical (i.e., the office crab as suggested by Fisher, 2002) may find themselves socially isolated and unable to achieve what they had hoped. We propose that because cynical criticism is not based on humor, new perspectives cannot be gained from such critiques, and colleagues’ social support may be withdrawn, which will cause the employee to retreat from organizational life. Notably, a common element of burnout – the

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

261

feeling of a serious lack of accomplishment in the workplace – may thus be related strongly to an employee’s excessive use of cynical criticism. From the perspective of a supervisor, a highly cynical subordinate may seem like a significant obstacle. However, in the words of Cutler (2000): The challenge for the rest of the organization is to accommodate the corporate hereticythe cynic is present in the organization whether one likes it or not, rather than developing a management culture which does not tolerate cynicism, it may be more expedient to find a way of tapping into the cynic’s resources. Stamping him or her out is not a practical option. (p. 310)

In other words, as cynicism in organizations becomes more prevalent, supervisors cannot simply expect organizational cynics to sit back quietly and keep their views to themselves. The organizational cynic may look for other outlets for his or her cynical witticisms or take his or her show ‘‘underground’’ if his or her opinions aren’t considered. So what is an organization to do? While managers may try to squash anti-organization sentiment, most cynical humor may serve as a coping mechanism by which employees vent their frustrations. Trying to suppress organizational cynics from defacing workplace fliers, or from making mildly subversive jokes may be impractical, and reduce the critical thinking and reevaluation that might actually benefit the organization through enhanced inrole performance. In addition, cynical humor may create social support and camaraderie within workgroups overwhelmed with the pace of change and by innumerous (but not often logically pondered) management initiatives. However, if cynical critiques become unceasing and even excessive, and management notices that the subtle distancing of humor is absent, management may need to intervene. The cynical critic may withdraw for lack of social support, and his/her in-role performance may suffer.

REFERENCES Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Andersson, L., & Bateman, T. S. (1997). Cynicism in the work place: Some causes and effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 449–470. Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. The Academy of Management Review, 24, 452–471. Ashforth, B. E., & Lee, R. L. (1997). Burnout as a process: Commentary on Cordes, Dougherty and Blum. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 51, 897–927. Baker, R. A., Ware, R., Spires, G. H., & Osborn, W. C. (1966). The effects of supervisory threat on decision making and risk taking in a simulated combat game. Behavioral Sciences, 11, 167–176.

262

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufelli, W. B. (2003). The socially induced burnout model. In: S. P. Shohov (Ed.), Advances in psychology research (Vol. 25, pp. 13–30). Hauppaug, NY: Usishers, Inc. Barnett, R. C., Marshall, N. L., Raudenbush, S. W., & Brennan, T. R. (1993). Gender and the relationship between job experiences and psychological distress: A study of dual-earner couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(5), 794–806. Barsoux, J. L. (1996). Why organizations need humor. European Management Journal, 14(5), 500–508. Beehr, T. A., Walsh, J. T., & Taber, T. D. (1976). Relationship of stress to individually and organizationally valued states: Higher order needs a moderator. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 41–47. Begley, T. M. (1998). Coping strategies as predictors of employee distress and turnover after an organizational consolidation: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 71, 305–329. Boswell, W. R., Olson-Buchanan, J. B., & Lepine, M. A. (2004). Relations between stress and work outcomes: The role of felt challenge, job control and psychological strain. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 165–181. Brandes, P. (1997). Organizational cynicism. Doctoral dissertation, University of Cincinnati, Ohio. Brandes, P., Dharwadkar, R., & Dean, J. W. (1999). Does organizational cynicism matter? Employee and supervisor perspectives on work outcomes. Best paper proceedings of the 36th Annual meeting of the Eastern Academy of Management, Philadelphia. Brockner, J., Tyler, T. R., & Cooper-Schneider, R. (1992). The influence of prior commitment to an institution on reactions to perceived unfairness: The higher they are, the harder they fall. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 241–261. Burke, R. J. (1987). Burnout in police work: An examination of the Cherniss model. Group and Organization Studies, 12(2), 174–188. Cartwright, S., & Cooper, C. L. (1996). Coping in occupational settings. In: M. Zeidner & N. S. Endler (Eds), Handbook of coping: Theory research and applications (pp. 202–220). Wiley. Cherniss, C. (1980). Professional burnout in human service organizations. New York: Praeger. Chrobot-Mason, D. L. (2003). Keeping the promise: Psychological contract violations for minority employees. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18, 22–46. Code, S., & Langan-Fox, J. (2001). Motivation, cognitions and traits: Predicting occupational health, well being and performance. Stress and Health, 17, 159–174. Cordes, C. L., Dougherty, T. W., & Blum, M. (1997). Patterns of burnout among managers and professionals: A comparison of models; summary. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(6), 685–702. Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D. E., & Byrne, A. S. (2003). The relationship of emotional exhaustion to work attitudes, job performance and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1), 160–169. Cutler, I. (2000). The cynical manager. Management Learning, 31(3), 295–312. Dean, J. W., Jr., Brandes, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (1998). Organizational cynicism. The Academy of Management Review, 22, 341–352. Deary, I. J., Blenkin, H., Agius, R. M., Endler, N. S., Zeally, H., & Wood, R. (1996). Models of job related stress and personal achievement among consultant doctors. British Journal of Psychology, 87, 3–29.

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

263

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 499–512. Duncan, W. J., Smeltzer, L. R., & Leap, T. L. (1990). Humor and work: Applications of joking behavior to management. Journal of Management, 16(2), 255–278. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Ferris, G., Bowen, M. G., Hochwarter, W. A., Hall, A. T., & Perrewe´, P. L. (2005). The assumed linearity of organizational phenomena: Implications for occupational stress and well-being. In: P. L. Perrewe´ & D. C. Ganster (Eds), Research in Occupational Stress and Well-Being, Vol. 5. Oxford, UK: JAI Press/Elsevier Science. Fisher, A. (2002). Are you constructively critical or the office crab? Fortune, 145(2), 130. Fleming, P., & Spicer, A. (2003). Working at a cynical distance: Implications for power, subjectivity and resistance. Organization, 10(1), 157–179. Freud, S. (1960). Jokes and their relation to the subconscious. New York: Norton. Fried, Y., Rowland, K. D., & Ferris, G. R. (1984). The physiological measurement of work stress: A critique. Personnel Psychology, 37, 583–615. Fugate, M., Kinicki, A. J., & Scheck, C. L. (2002). Coping with an organizational merger over four stages. Personnel Psychology, 55(4), 905–928. Fuller, B. A. G. (1931). History of Greek philosophy. New York: Henry Holt. Goldner, F. H., Ritti, R. R., & Ference, T. P. (1977). The production of cynical knowledge in organizations. American Sociological Review, 42, 539–551. Gomez-Mejia, L., Balkin, D., & Cardy, R. (2004). Managing human resources (4th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Greenberg, J. (1990). Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of pay cuts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 561–568. Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Buckley, M. R. (2004). Burnout in organizational life. Journal of Management, 30(6), 859–879. Hart, P. M. (1997). Personality, work-related experiences and organizational cynicism: A longitudinal study. Paper presented at the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology Annual Meeting, St. Louis, MO. Hilgard, E. R. (1980). The trilogy of mind: Cognition, affection, and conation. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 16, 107–117. Jackofsky, E., Ferris, K., & Breckenridge, B. (1986). Evidence for a curvilinear relationship between performance and turnover. Journal of Management, 12, 105–111. Jamal, M. (1984). Job stress and job performance controversy: An empirical assessment. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 33, 1–21. Jamal, M. (1985). Relationship of job stress to job performance: A study of managers and bluecollar workers. Human Relations, 5, 409–424. Jex, S. M., Beehr, T. A., & Roberts, C. K. (1992). The meaning of occupational strain items to survey respondents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 623–628. Johnson, J., & O’Leary-Kelly, A. (2003). The effects of psychological contract breach and organizational cynicism: Not all social exchange violations are created equal. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 627–647. Jones, J. W., & Dubois, D. (1987). A review of organizational stress assessment instruments. In: L. R. Murphy & T. F. Schoenborn (Eds), Stress management in work setting. Washington, DC: Public Health Services. Kanter, D. L., & Mirvis, P. H. (1989). The cynical Americans. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

264

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

Kassel, J. D., Stroud, L. R., & Paronis, C. A. (2003). Smoking, stress, and negative affect: Correlation, causation, and context across stages of smoking. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 270–304. Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (1979). Organizational stress: A call for management action. Sloan Management Review, 21(1), 3–11. Koeske, G. F., & Koeske, R. D. (1989). Construct validity of the Maslach burnout inventory: A critical review and reconceptualization. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 25, 131–144. Koslowsky, M. (1998). Modeling the stress–strain relationship in work settings. London, New York: Routledge Progress in Psychology. Landsbergis, P. A., & Vivona-Vaughan, E. (1995). Evaluation of an occupational stress intervention in a public agency. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 29–48. Lazarus, R., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer Publishing. Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. (1990). On the meaning of Maslach’s three dimensions of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(6), 743–747. Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. (1993). A further examination of managerial burnout: Toward an integrated model; summary. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 3–21. Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. (1996). A further examination of managerial burnout: Toward an integrated model; summary. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(2), 123–133. LeFevre, M., Matheny, J., & Kolt, G. S. (2003). Eustress, distress, and interpretation in occupational stress. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18, 726–745. Leiter, M. P. (1993). Burnout as a developmental process: Consideration of models. In: W. B. Scahufeli, C. Maslach & T. Marek (Eds), Professional burnout: Recent developments in theory and research (pp. 237–250). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Mack, B. L. (1993). The lost gospel: The book of Q and Christian origins. New York: HarperCollins. Martin, R. A., & Lefcourt, H. M. (1983). Sense of humor as a moderator of the relation between stressors and moods. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1318–1324. Martocchio, J. J., & O’Leary, A. M. (1989). Sex differences in stress: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 495–501. Maslach, C. (1982). Burnout: The cost of caring. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). Maslach burnout inventory manual (3rd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. (1997). The truth about burnout. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Meyerson, D. E. (1990). Uncovering socially undesirable emotions: Experiences of ambiguity in organizations. The American Behavioral Scientist, 33(3), 296–307. Meyerson, D. E. (1994). Interpretations of stress in institutions: The cultural production of ambiguity and burnout. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(4), 628–654. Mishra, A. K., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1998). Explaining how survivors respond to downsizing: The role of trust, empowerment, justice, and work redesign. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 567–588. Moos, R. H. (1982). Work-stress and the stress-buffering roles of work and family resources. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 3, 215–232. More, P. E. (1923). Hellenistic philosophies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Morrow, P. C. (1983). Concept redundancy in organizational research: The case of work commitment. The Academy of Management Review, 8(3), 486–501. Mossholder, K., Bedeian, A., Norris, D., Giles, W., & Feild, H. (1988). Job performance and turnover decisions: Two field studies. Journal of Management, 14, 403–414.

Locating Behavioral Cynicism at Work

265

Motowildo, S. J., Packard, J. S., & Manning, M. R. (1986). Occupational stress: Its causes and consequences for job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(4), 618–630. O’Leary-Kelly, A. M., Griffin, R. W., & Glew, D. J. (1996). Organization-motivated aggression: A research framework. The Academy of Management Review, 27, 225–253. Pearson, C. M., & Porath, C. L. (2005). On the nature, consequences, and remedies of workplace incivility: No time for ‘‘nice’’? Think again. The Academy of Management Executive, 19(1), 7–15. Perrewe´, P. L., & Zellars, K. L. (1999). An examination of attributions and emotions in the transactional approach to the organizational stress process. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 739–752. Perrewe´, P. L., Zellers, K. L., Ferris, G. R., Rossi, A. M., Kacmar, C. J., & Ralson, D. A. (2004). Neutralizing job stressors: Political skill as an antidote to the dysfunctional consequences of role conflict. The Academy of Management Journal, 47(1), 141–152. Potter III, E. H., & Fiedler, F. E. (1981). The utilization of staff member intelligence and experience under high and low stress. The Academy of Management Journal, 24, 361–376. Pugh, S. D., Skarlicki, D. P., & Passell, B. S. (2003). After the fall: Layoff victims’ trust and cynicism in re-employment. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 201–212. Quick, J. C., & Quick, J. D. (1984). Organizational stress and preventive management. New York: McGraw-Hill. Rabinowitz, S., & Stumpf, S. A. (1987). Facets of role conflict, role-specific performance, and organizational level within the academic career. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 30, 72–83. Reichers, A. E., Wanous, P., & Austin, J. T. (1997). Understanding and managing cynicism about organizational change. The Academy of Management Executive, 11, 48–49. Richardsen, A. M., & Martinussen, M. (2004). The Maslach burnout inventory: Factorial validity and consistency across occupational groups in Norway. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 77(3), 377–384. Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. The Academy of Management Journal, 38, 555–572. Robinson, S. L., & O’Leary-Kelly, A. M. (1998). Monkey see, monkey do: The influence of work groups on the antisocial behavior of employees. The Academy of Management Journal, 41, 658–672. Schaubroeck, J., Cotton, J. L., & Jennings, K. R. (1989). Antecedents and consequences of role stress: A covariance structure analysis; summary. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2(1), 35–59. Schaubroeck, J., & Merrit, D. E. (1997). Divergent effects of job control on coping with work stressors: The key role of self-efficacy. The Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 738–755. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293–315. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of burnout and engagement: A confirmative analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92. Schutte, N., Toppinen, S., Kalimo, R., & Schaufeli, W. (2000). The factorial validity of the Maslach burnout inventory – General survey (MBI-GS) across occupational groups and nations. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 53–67. Selye, I. L. (1964). From dream to discovery. New York: McGraw-Hill.

266

PAMELA BRANDES AND DIYA DAS

Smith, M. B. (1947). The personal setting of public opinions: A study of attitudes toward Russia. Public Opinion Quarterly, 11, 507–523. Spielberger, C. D., & Reheiser, E. G. (1994). The job stress survey: Measuring gender differences in occupation stress. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 9(2), 199–218. Sullivan, S. E., & Bhagat, R. S. (1992). Organizational stress, job satisfaction and job performance: Where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 18(2), 353–374. Toppinen-Tanner, S., Kalimo, R., & Mutanen, P. (2002). The process of burnout in white-collar and blue-collar jobs: Eight-year prospective study of exhaustion. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(5), 555–570. Waldroop, J., & Butler, T. (2001). The 12 bad habits that hold good people back. New York: Doubleday. Wanous, J., Reichers, A., & Austin, J. (2000). Cynicism about organizational change. Group and Organization Management, 25, 132–153. Westman, M., & Eden, D. (1992). Excessive role demand and subsequent performance; introduction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(5), 519–530. Westwood, R. (2004). Comic relief: Subversion and catharsis in organizational comedic theatre. Organization Studies, 25(5), 775–790. Williams, C., & Livingstone, L. (1994). A second look at the relationship between performance and voluntary turnover. The Academy of Management Journal, 37, 219–231. Yerkes-Dobson Law (1908). The relationship of stimulus to rapidity of habit formation. Journal of Comparative Neurological Psychology, 18, 459–482. Yovetich, N. A., Dale, J. A., & Hudak, M. A. (1990). Benefits of humor in reduction of threatinduced anxiety. Psychological Reports, 66, 51–58. Zaccaro, S. J., & Riley, A. W. (1987). Stress coping and organizational effectiveness. In: Riley & Zaccaro (Eds), Occupational stress and organizational effectiveness. New York: Praeger.

APPENDIX Items are used to measure the cynical humor and cynical criticism as shown in Table A1. Table A1.

Cynical Humor and Cynical Criticism Items.

Cynical Humor Items 1. I enjoy joking with others about (company)’s slogans and sayings. 2. My coworkers recognize me for my witty comments about the way things work at (company). 3. I like to offer my own interpretations of the way things really work at (company) to those who will listen. 4. I have my own ‘‘special versions’’ of (company)’s sayings. 1. 2. 3. 4.

I I I I

Cynical Criticism Items complain about how things happen at (company) to friends outside the organization. exchange ‘‘knowing’’ glances with my coworkers. often talk to others about the way things are run at (company). criticize (company)’s practices and policies with others.

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS Tammy D. Allen, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of South Florida. She earned her Ph.D. in industrial and organizational psychology from the University of Tennessee. Her research interests include mentoring relationships, career development, work and family issues, occupational health psychology, and organizational citizenship behavior. Her research has been published in journals such as Journal of Applied Psychology, Personnel Psychology, Journal of Management, and Journal of Vocational Behavior. Rosalind Chait Barnett, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist and the Executive Director of the Community, Families, and Work Program at Brandeis University’s Women’s Studies Research Center. Alone and with others, she has published over 100 articles, 26 chapters, and seven books. She has published in such journals as the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, the Journal of Marriage and Family, the Journal of Organizational Behavior, the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, and the Annals of Behavioral Medicine. She is the recipient of the 1997 best paper of the year award by the Journal of Organizational Behavior. Dr. Barnett is the recipient of several national awards, including the American Personnel and Guidance Association’s Annual Award for Outstanding Research, the Radcliffe College Graduate Society’s Distinguished Achievement Medal and Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government’s 1999 Goldsmith Research Award. Michael G. Bowen received a Ph.D. in Business Administration from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and has taught at the University of Illinois, the University of Notre Dame, and the University of South Florida. Having published scholarly papers and case studies on the ‘‘escalation phenomenon,’’ business ethics, leadership, and decision-making, Professor Bowen’s articles have appeared in such journals as the Academy of 267

268

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS

Management Review, the Business Ethics Quarterly, and the System Dynamics Review. Dr. Bowen co-founded the Leadership Development Center at the University of South Florida and is currently a member of the Management Department there. Pamela Brandes is an Assistant Professor of Strategy and Human Resource Management at the Whitman School of Management at Syracuse University. Her main research and teaching interests include executive and non-executive employee compensation, corporate governance, and employee–organization linkages. She has published in Academy of Management Review, Academy of Management Executive, Group and Organization Management, Human Resource Management Review, and Journal of Business Research. She completed her Ph.D. in Management from the University of Cincinnati. Diya Das is a doctoral candidate in the department of Strategy and Human Resource Management at the Whitman School of Management at Syracuse University. Her main research interests include issues of social identities in global workplaces, executive compensation, employee surveillance, and the employee–organization interface. She has published in Human Resource Management Review. She has an B.A. Honors in Sociology from Presidency College, Calcutta, and a Masters from the Delhi School of Economics in Human Resources and Organizational Development. Gerald R. Ferris is the Francis Eppes Professor of Management and Professor of Psychology at Florida State University. He received a Ph.D. in Business Administration from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Ferris has research interests in the areas of social influence and effectiveness processes in organizations, and the role of reputation in organizations, and he is the author of articles published in such journals as the Journal of Applied Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Personnel Psychology, Academy of Management Journal, and Academy of Management Review. Suzy Fox is Associate Professor in the Institute of Human Resources and Industrial Relations, Graduate School of Business, Loyola University Chicago, where she teaches organizational behavior, global human resource management, and ethics. She received her Ph.D. in Industrial/Organizational

About the Contributing Authors

269

Psychology and MBA from the University of South Florida. Current research projects include studies of emotional and behavioral responses to job stress, counterproductive work behavior, relations between subtle/symbolic/ modern racism and bullying in the workplace (‘‘racial/ethnic bullying’’), and international comparisons of professionally successful women. With Paul Spector, she co-edited Counterproductive Work Behavior: Investigations of Actors and Targets. Her work has appeared in the Journal of Vocational Behavior, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Organizational Dynamics, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Human Resource Management Review, International Review of Selection and Assessment, Personnel Psychology, and the Handbook of Organization Studies. She just completed three years as associate editor of Human Relations. Charlotte Fritz is Assistant Professor of Industrial and Organizational Psychology at Bowling Green State University. She earned her Ph.D. in 2005 at the Technical University of Braunschweig, Germany. Her research interests include work stress, recovery from work demands, emotions and job performance, and proactive behaviors at work. So far she has published in the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology and the Journal of Applied Psychology. Jeffrey H. Greenhaus is Professor and William A. Mackie Chair in the Department of Management at Drexel University’s LeBow College of Business. Jeff’s research focuses on work–family relationships and career dynamics. He is co-author of Career Management with Gerry Callanan and Ronnie Godshalk, now in its third edition (2000). He is also co-editor with Saroj Parasuraman of Integrating Work and Family: Challenges and Choices for a Changing World (1997), and co-author with Stew Friedman of Work and Family – Allies or Enemies? What Happens When Business Professionals Confront Life Choices (2000). He is currently co-editing (with Gerry Callanan) the two-volume Encyclopedia of Career Development to be published by SAGE in 2006.

Angela T. Hall is Assistant Professor of Business Law in the Department of Risk Management and Insurance, Real Estate, and Business Law, College of Business, Florida State University. She received a Ph.D. in Management from Florida State University. Also, Dr. Hall obtained a Juris Doctor

270

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS

degree from Florida State University, College of Law in 1993, and practiced law for a number of years in Florida. Her research interests include accountability and legal issues in human resources management, and her published research has appeared in such journals as the Journal of Organizational Behavior and The Leadership Quarterly. Wayne A. Hochwarter is Associate Professor of Management at Florida State University. He received a Ph.D. in Business Administration from Florida State University, and has been on the faculties at Mississippi State University and the University of Alabama. His research interests include social influence processes in organizations, interpersonal effectiveness, accountability, and health consequences of stress at work. He has published articles in the Journal of Applied Psychology, Administrative Sciences Quarterly, the Journal of Management, and the Journal of Vocational Behavior on these topics. Pamela Braboy Jackson is Associate Professor of Sociology at Indiana University – Bloomington. Her primary research interests include the study of social roles, stress and mental health, and race and gender tokenism in the workplace. In addition to these areas, Dr. Jackson has published on the topics of socialization, identity, self-concept development, and health disparities. Recent publications include ‘‘Role Sequencing: Does Order Matter for Mental Health?’’ (Journal of Health and Social Behavior) and ‘‘Social Sources of Health Disparities’’ (with D. Williams, Health Affairs). Pamela L. Perrewe´ is the Distinguished Research Professor and the Jim Moran Professor of Management in the College of Business at Florida State University. Dr. Perrewe´ received her Bachelors degree in Psychology from Purdue University and her Masters and Ph.D. degrees in Management from the University of Nebraska. She has focused her research interests in the areas of job stress, coping, organizational politics and personality. Dr. Perrewe´ has published her work in journals such as Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Management, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Journal of Vocational Behavior, and Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Tiffani Saunders is a graduate student in the Department of Sociology at Indiana University, Bloomington. Her research interests include occupational stress, social support, mental health, and economic well being.

About the Contributing Authors

271

Sabine Sonnentag is a full professor of Work and Organizational Psychology at the University of Konstanz (Germany). She studied psychology at the Free University Berlin and received her Ph.D. from the Technical University of Braunschweig. Subsequently she worked at the University of Giessen, the University of Amsterdam, the University of Konstanz, and the Technical University of Braunschweig. One of her major research areas refers to the study of work stress and recovery processes. In her empirical work she examines how individuals recover from work stress, how they initiate recovery processes and how recovery impacts on well-being and job-related behavior. Other research interests include: Performance at work and its relationship to self-regulatory processes, and learning at work. She has published in journals such as the Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, and Personnel Psychology. Paul E. Spector is a professor of I/O psychology and the I/O doctoral program director at the University of South Florida. His work has appeared in many journals, including Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Management, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Personnel Psychology, and Psychological Bulletin. At present he is the Point/Counterpoint editor for Journal of Organizational Behavior, and is on the editorial boards of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Organizational Research Methods, and Personnel Psychology. In 1991, the Institute For Scientific Information listed him as one of the 50 highest impact contemporary researchers (out of over 102,000) in psychology worldwide. Darren C. Treadway is Assistant Professor of Management at the University of Mississippi. He received a Ph.D. in Management from Florida State University and an MBA from Virginia Tech. Dr. Treadway’s research interests include political skill, diversity, the role of age in the workplace, and social influence processes in organizations. His research has been published in Journal of Management, Journal of Applied Psychology, The Leadership Quarterly, Journal of Organizational Behavior, and Journal of Applied Social Psychology.

This page intentionally left blank

272