logging in or signing up Stressed-out. aSGuest6300 Download Post to : URL : Related Presentations : Share Add to Flag Embed Email Send to Blogs and Networks Add to Channel Uploaded from authorPOINT lite Insert YouTube videos in PowerPont slides with aS Desktop Copy embed code: (To copy code, click on the text box) Embed: URL: Thumbnail: WordPress Embed Customize Embed The presentation is successfully added In Your Favorites. Views: 41 Category: Science & Tech.. License: All Rights Reserved Like it (0) Dislike it (0) Added: December 11, 2008 This Presentation is Public Favorites: 0 Presentation Description No description available. Comments Posting comment... Premium member Presentation Transcript The Complex Relationship of General Stress, Job Attitudes, and Performance : The Complex Relationship of General Stress, Job Attitudes, and Performance Michael R. Bashshur Carra S. Sims University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign Overview : Overview Background Prior models of the relationship between Stress, Job Satisfaction and Performance Tests of each model An integrative test of the theories Discussion of implications and future directions Background : Background Job satisfaction and performance Recent Work by Judge, Thoresen, Bono, & Patton (2001). Large set of potential moderators and mediators of this relationship Stress : Stress Lazarus and Folkman (1984) Transactional Theory of Stress Stress as a relational, appraisal process: An event or an environment appraised as taxing or exceeding one’s resources Situation -- an appraisal of that situation -- An attempt to cope -- then a secondary appraisal Stress (continued) : Stress (continued) Two streams of research can be observed in the literature that suggest at least two (conflicting) models of the relationship between stress, job satisfaction and performance. One way mediating effects of satisfaction : One way mediating effects of satisfaction Stress Job Attitudes Performance Hendrix, Ovalle, & Troxler (1985) Kemery, Mossholder, and Bedeian (1987) Wolpin, Burke, & Greenglass (1991) Job Attitudes Stress Performance Leiter & Robichaud (1997) Sample and Measures : Sample and Measures Sample 976 Employees from a large Midwestern Univ. 102 employees from Lebanese School Performance Broader conceptualization of performance (Judge, et al., 2001): Citizenship behavior and Counterproductive behavior Job Withdrawal behavior (i.e. intentions to quit and behavior related to quitting). Measures (continued) : Measures (continued) Job Attitudes Job Descriptive Index- JDI (Balzer, et al, 2000) 4 Facets Stress Stress in General (Stanton et al, 2001) 2 Facets Threat Pressure Mediation Results : Mediation Results Both models of mediation supported by the data Stress mediates the relationship between Satisfaction and Performance Satisfaction Mediates the relationship between Stress and Performance All mediational paths for both models significant at .01 Suggests that there may be a causal loop between stress and job attitudes Non-Recursive Modeling : Non-Recursive Modeling Variables reciprocally influence one another. For example: Educated people value education, people who value education tend to go to school more. Non-Recursive Modeling (cont’d) : Non-Recursive Modeling (cont’d) More complex testing of our models Non-recursive modeling of cross-sectional data. Very difficult to fit models, even clearly over-identified ones (Maruyama, 1998) Full Model : Full Model Job Complexity Negative Affect Neuroticism Stress Job Satisfaction Positive Affect Discrimination Job Withdrawal Citizenship Behaviors Counterproductive Behaviors Reduced Model – Threat : Reduced Model – Threat χ2= 902.35, df=123, RMSEA=.08, CFI=.89, GFI=.90 , NFI=.88 Job Complexity Negative Affect Threat Job Satisfaction Positive Affect Discrimination Job Withdrawal -.22 -.17 .12 -.59 Reduced Model – Pressure : Job Complexity Negative Affect Pressure Job Satisfaction Positive Affect Discrimination Job Withdrawal χ2= 806.02, df=123, RMSEA=.075, CFI=.89, GFI=.92 , NFI=.87 Coefficients with an “*” indicate non-significant relationships .30 -.06* .10 -.68 Reduced Model – Pressure Discussion : Discussion The evidence presented here suggests that the relationships are very complex. It seems we are near the limits of our ability to test the more complex relationships inherent in our models of attitudes and performance. If we are to begin rigorously testing these relationships we will need to move to longitudinal models and/or computational modeling. Future Research : Future Research Taking our own advice: Longitudinal Study, 2nd wave being analyzed now. Other outcomes such as organizational commitment Relationships with facets of satisfaction. Copies of Presentation Papers : Copies of Presentation Papers For a copy of any of the papers, please visit: http://io.psych.uiuc.edu/conference.HTML You do not have the permission to view this presentation. In order to view it, please contact the author of the presentation.
Stressed-out. aSGuest6300 Download Post to : URL : Related Presentations : Share Add to Flag Embed Email Send to Blogs and Networks Add to Channel Uploaded from authorPOINT lite Insert YouTube videos in PowerPont slides with aS Desktop Copy embed code: (To copy code, click on the text box) Embed: URL: Thumbnail: WordPress Embed Customize Embed The presentation is successfully added In Your Favorites. Views: 41 Category: Science & Tech.. License: All Rights Reserved Like it (0) Dislike it (0) Added: December 11, 2008 This Presentation is Public Favorites: 0 Presentation Description No description available. Comments Posting comment... Premium member Presentation Transcript The Complex Relationship of General Stress, Job Attitudes, and Performance : The Complex Relationship of General Stress, Job Attitudes, and Performance Michael R. Bashshur Carra S. Sims University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign Overview : Overview Background Prior models of the relationship between Stress, Job Satisfaction and Performance Tests of each model An integrative test of the theories Discussion of implications and future directions Background : Background Job satisfaction and performance Recent Work by Judge, Thoresen, Bono, & Patton (2001). Large set of potential moderators and mediators of this relationship Stress : Stress Lazarus and Folkman (1984) Transactional Theory of Stress Stress as a relational, appraisal process: An event or an environment appraised as taxing or exceeding one’s resources Situation -- an appraisal of that situation -- An attempt to cope -- then a secondary appraisal Stress (continued) : Stress (continued) Two streams of research can be observed in the literature that suggest at least two (conflicting) models of the relationship between stress, job satisfaction and performance. One way mediating effects of satisfaction : One way mediating effects of satisfaction Stress Job Attitudes Performance Hendrix, Ovalle, & Troxler (1985) Kemery, Mossholder, and Bedeian (1987) Wolpin, Burke, & Greenglass (1991) Job Attitudes Stress Performance Leiter & Robichaud (1997) Sample and Measures : Sample and Measures Sample 976 Employees from a large Midwestern Univ. 102 employees from Lebanese School Performance Broader conceptualization of performance (Judge, et al., 2001): Citizenship behavior and Counterproductive behavior Job Withdrawal behavior (i.e. intentions to quit and behavior related to quitting). Measures (continued) : Measures (continued) Job Attitudes Job Descriptive Index- JDI (Balzer, et al, 2000) 4 Facets Stress Stress in General (Stanton et al, 2001) 2 Facets Threat Pressure Mediation Results : Mediation Results Both models of mediation supported by the data Stress mediates the relationship between Satisfaction and Performance Satisfaction Mediates the relationship between Stress and Performance All mediational paths for both models significant at .01 Suggests that there may be a causal loop between stress and job attitudes Non-Recursive Modeling : Non-Recursive Modeling Variables reciprocally influence one another. For example: Educated people value education, people who value education tend to go to school more. Non-Recursive Modeling (cont’d) : Non-Recursive Modeling (cont’d) More complex testing of our models Non-recursive modeling of cross-sectional data. Very difficult to fit models, even clearly over-identified ones (Maruyama, 1998) Full Model : Full Model Job Complexity Negative Affect Neuroticism Stress Job Satisfaction Positive Affect Discrimination Job Withdrawal Citizenship Behaviors Counterproductive Behaviors Reduced Model – Threat : Reduced Model – Threat χ2= 902.35, df=123, RMSEA=.08, CFI=.89, GFI=.90 , NFI=.88 Job Complexity Negative Affect Threat Job Satisfaction Positive Affect Discrimination Job Withdrawal -.22 -.17 .12 -.59 Reduced Model – Pressure : Job Complexity Negative Affect Pressure Job Satisfaction Positive Affect Discrimination Job Withdrawal χ2= 806.02, df=123, RMSEA=.075, CFI=.89, GFI=.92 , NFI=.87 Coefficients with an “*” indicate non-significant relationships .30 -.06* .10 -.68 Reduced Model – Pressure Discussion : Discussion The evidence presented here suggests that the relationships are very complex. It seems we are near the limits of our ability to test the more complex relationships inherent in our models of attitudes and performance. If we are to begin rigorously testing these relationships we will need to move to longitudinal models and/or computational modeling. Future Research : Future Research Taking our own advice: Longitudinal Study, 2nd wave being analyzed now. Other outcomes such as organizational commitment Relationships with facets of satisfaction. Copies of Presentation Papers : Copies of Presentation Papers For a copy of any of the papers, please visit: http://io.psych.uiuc.edu/conference.HTML