Refine
H-BRS Bibliography
- yes (19)
Departments, institutes and facilities
Has Fulltext
- yes (19) (remove)
Keywords
- recovery (4)
- work engagement (4)
- burnout (3)
- psychological detachment (3)
- rumination (3)
- work reflection (3)
- Detachment (2)
- affective events (2)
- employee well-being (2)
- experience sampling (2)
In the literature on occupational stress and recovery from work, several facets of thinking about work during off-job time have been conceptualized. However, research on the focal concepts is currently rather diffuse. In this study we take a closer look at the five most well-established concepts: (1) psychological detachment, (2) affective rumination, (3) problem-solving pondering, (4) positive work reflection, and (5) negative work reflection. More specifically, we scrutinized (1) whether the five facets of work-related rumination are empirically distinct, (2) whether they yield differential associations with different facets of employee well-being (burnout, work engagement, thriving, satisfaction with life, and flourishing), and (3) to what extent the five facets can be distinguished from and relate to conceptually similar constructs, such as irritation, worry, and neuroticism. We applied structural equation modeling techniques to cross-sectional survey data from 474 employees. Our results provide evidence for (1) five correlated, yet empirically distinct facets of work-related rumination. (2) Each facet yields a unique pattern of association with the eight aspects of employee well-being. For instance, detachment is strongly linked to satisfaction with life and flourishing. Affective rumination is linked particularly to burnout. Problem-solving pondering and positive work reflection yield the strongest links to work engagement. (3) The five facets of work-related rumination are distinct from related concepts, although there is a high overlap between (lower levels of) psychological detachment and cognitive irritation. Our study contributes to clarifying the structure of work-related rumination and extends the nomological network around different types of thinking about work during off-job time and employee well-being.
In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in psychological need satisfaction and its role in promoting optimal functioning. The DRAMMA model integrates existing need and recovery models to explain why leisure is connected to optimal functioning (i.e., high well-being and low ill-being). It encompasses six psychological needs: detachment, relaxation, autonomy, mastery, meaning, and affiliation (DRAMMA). While the individual needs of the DRAMMA model have been previously shown to relate to different aspects of optimal functioning, a longitudinal study examining the entire model has not been conducted before. In this longitudinal field study covering leisure and work episodes, we tested the within-person reliability and (construct and criterion) validity of the operationalization of the DRAMMA model in a sample of 279 German employees. Participants filled out measures of DRAMMA need satisfaction and optimal functioning at five measurement times before, during, and after vacation periods in 2016 and 2017. The six-factor model showed good fit to the data. In the multilevel models, relaxation, detachment, autonomy, and mastery had the most consistent within-person effects on optimal functioning, while the relationships between optimal functioning, meaning, and affiliation were considerably weaker. In conclusion, DRAMMA need satisfaction can aid and nurture employees’ optimal functioning.
Although work events can be regarded as pivotal elements of organizational life, only a few studies have examined how positive and negative events relate to and combine to affect work engagement over time. Theory suggests that to better understand how current events affect work engagement (WE), we have to account for recent events that have preceded these current events. We present competing theoretical views on how recent and current work events may affect employees (e.g., getting used to a high frequency of negative events or becoming more sensitive to negative events). Although the occurrence of events implies discrete changes in the experience of work, prior research has not considered whether work events actually accumulate to sustained mid-term changes in WE. To address these gaps in the literature, we conducted a week-level longitudinal study across a period of 15 consecutive weeks among 135 employees, which yielded 849 weekly observations. While positive events were associated with higher levels of WE within the same week, negative events were not. Our results support neither satiation nor sensitization processes. However, high frequencies of negative events in the preceding week amplified the beneficial effects of positive events on WE in the current week. Growth curve analyses show that the benefits of positive events accumulate to sustain high levels of WE. WE dissipates in the absence of continuous experience of positive events. Our study adds a temporal component and informs research that has taken a feature-oriented perspective on the dynamic interplay of job demands and resources.
Background: While work-related rumination increases the risk of acute stressors developing into chronic load reactions and adverse health, mental detachment has been suggested as a way to interrupt this chain. Despite the importance of mentally detaching from work during leisure time, workers seem to struggle to disengage and, instead, experience the constant mental representation of work-related stressors, regardless of their absence. Those who struggle with work-related rumination could benefit from an easy-access intervention that fosters mental detachment by promoting recreational activities. Especially during vacations, workers appear to naturally engage in sufficient recovery activities; however, this beneficial behaviour is not sustained. The smartphone app-based intervention “Holidaily” promotes recovery behaviour and, thus, mental detachment from work with the intension of extending the beneficial effects of workers’ vacations into their daily working life.
Methods: This randomised-controlled trial (RCT) evaluates the efficacy of “Holidaily”. The Holidaily app is a German stand-alone program for mobile devices with either Android/iOS operating systems. The sample includes workers, who are awaiting to go on vacation and are randomly assigned to either the intervention (IG) or a waitlist-control group (CG). The IG receives two weeks pre-vacation access to Holidaily, while the CG receives access two weeks post-vacation. On a daily basis participants in the IG are provided with three options promoting recreational activities and beneficial recovery experiences. Online questionnaires are distributed to all participants at several timepoints. The primary outcome measure assesses participants’ work-related rumination (Irritation Scale). A significant difference two weeks post-vacation is expected, favouring the IG. Secondary outcomes include symptoms of depression, insomnia severity, emotional exhaustion, thinking about work, recovery experiences, vacation specifics, work and personal characteristics. To help explain the intervention’s effect, explorative analyses will investigate the mediation properties of the frequency of engaging in recreational activities and the moderation properties of Holidaily users’ experiences.
Discussion: If successful, workers will maintain their recovery behaviour beyond their vacation into daily working life. Findings could, therefore, provide evidence for low-intensity interventions that could be very valuable from a public-health perspective. App-based interventions have greater reach; hence, more workers might access preventative tools to protect themselves from developing adverse health effects linked to work-related rumination. Further studies will still be needed to investigate whether the vacation phenomenon of “lots of fun quickly gone” can be defied and long-term benefits attained.
In March 2020, the world was hit by the coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) pandemic which led to all‐embracing measures to contain its spread. Most employees were forced to work from home and take care of their children because schools and daycares were closed. We present data from a research project in a large multinational organisation in the Netherlands with monthly quantitative measurements from January to May 2020 (N = 253–516), enriched with qualitative data from participants' comments before and after telework had started. Growth curve modelling showed major changes in employees' work‐related well‐being reflected in decreasing work engagement and increasing job satisfaction. For work‐non‐work balance, workload and autonomy, cubic trends over time were found, reflecting initial declines during crisis onset (March/April) and recovery in May. Participants' additional remarks exemplify that employees struggled with fulfilling different roles simultaneously, developing new routines and managing boundaries between life domains. Moderation analyses demonstrated that demographic variables shaped time trends. The diverging trends in well‐being indicators raise intriguing questions and show that close monitoring and fine‐grained analyses are needed to arrive at a better understanding of the impact of the crisis across time and among different groups of employees.
Shaping off-job life is becoming increasingly important for workers to increase and maintain their optimal functioning (i.e., feeling and performing well). Proactively shaping the job domain (referred to as job crafting) has been extensively studied, but crafting in the off-job domain has received markedly less research attention. Based on the Integrative Needs Model of Crafting, needs-based off-job crafting is defined as workers’ proactive and self-initiated changes in their off-job lives, which target psychological needs satisfaction. Off-job crafting is posited as a possible means for workers to fulfill their needs and enhance well-being and performance over time. We developed a new scale to measure off-job crafting and examined its relationships to optimal functioning in different work contexts in different regions around the world (the United States, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Finland, Japan, and the United Kingdom). Furthermore, we examined the criterion, convergent, incremental, discriminant, and structural validity evidence of the Needs-based Off-job Crafting Scale using multiple methods (longitudinal and cross-sectional survey studies, an “example generation”-task). The results showed that off-job crafting was related to optimal functioning over time, especially in the off-job domain but also in the job domain. Moreover, the novel off-job crafting scale had good convergent and discriminant validity, internal consistency, and test–retest reliability. To conclude, our series of studies in various countries show that off-job crafting can enhance optimal functioning in different life domains and support people in performing their duties sustainably. Therefore, shaping off-job life may be beneficial in an intensified and continually changing and challenging working life.
Guzzo et al. (Reference Guzzo, Schneider and Nalbantian2022) argue that open science practices may marginalize inductive and abductive research and preclude leveraging big data for scientific research. We share their assessment that the hypothetico-deductive paradigm has limitations (see also Staw, Reference Staw2016) and that big data provide grand opportunities (see also Oswald et al., Reference Oswald, Behrend, Putka and Sinar2020). However, we arrive at very different conclusions. Rather than opposing open science practices that build on a hypothetico-deductive paradigm, we should take initiative to do open science in a way compatible with the very nature of our discipline, namely by incorporating ambiguity and inductive decision-making. In this commentary, we (a) argue that inductive elements are necessary for research in naturalistic field settings across different stages of the research process, (b) discuss some misconceptions of open science practices that hide or discourage inductive elements, and (c) propose that field researchers can take ownership of open science in a way that embraces ambiguity and induction. We use an example research study to illustrate our points.
While academic research on recovery was rather segregated between occupational health psychology and management research at the beginning of the 20s century and streams of research developed independently, recent developments hint at a closing divide and better integration of recovery research across disciplines. This for example becomes evident in publications of researchers across the traditional outlets within both fields, as well as increasing close collaborations of researchers firmly rooted in one of the fields. In preparation of this special issue, the editors were interested in whether this development represents a convergence or even a true merging of research in these different disciplines. We therefore interviewed Prof. Sabine Sonnentag as expert from occupational health psychology research and Prof. Ute Stephan with expertise in management research. Both are excellent and world-famous researchers in their disciplines. We discussed the current state, the advances during the last years, and the future directions of recovery research in their respective fields. We also talked about their perspectives on integrative topics and about specific issues in both domains that might stimulate a new recovery management research agenda.
Many workers experience their jobs as effortful or even stressful, which can result in strain. Although recovery from work would be an adaptive strategy to prevent the adverse effects of work-related strain, many workers face problems finding enough time to rest and to mentally disconnect from work during nonwork time. What goes on in workers’ minds after a stressful workday? What is it about their jobs that makes them think about their work? This special issue aims to bridge the gap between research on recovery processes mainly examined in Occupational Health Psychology, and research on work stress and working hours, often investigated in the field of Human Resource Management. We first summarize conceptual and theoretical streams from both fields of research. In the following, we discuss the contributions of the five special issue papers and conclude with key messages and directions for further research.
Although work events can be regarded as pivotal elements of organizational life, only a few studies have examined how positive and negative events relate to and combine to affect work engagement over time. Theory suggests that, to better understand how current events affect work engagement (WE), we have to account for recent events that have preceded these current events. We present competing theoretical views on how recent and current work events may affect employees (e.g., getting used to a high frequency of negative events or becoming more sensitive to negative events). Although the occurrence of events implies discrete changes in the experience of work, prior research has not considered whether work events actually accumulate to sustained mid-term changes in WE. To address these gaps in the literature, we conducted a week-level longitudinal study across a period of 15 consecutive weeks among 135 employees, which yielded 849 weekly observations. While positive events were associated with higher levels of WE within the same week, negative events were not. Our results support neither satiation nor sensitization processes. However, a high frequency of negative events in the preceding week amplified the beneficial effects of positive events on WE in the current week. Growth curve analyses show that the benefits of positive events accumulate to sustain high levels of WE. WE dissipates in the absence of a continuous experience of positive events. Our study adds a temporal component by highlighting that positive events affect work engagement, particularly in light of recent negative events. Our study informs research that has taken a feature-oriented perspective on the dynamic interplay of job demands and resources.