Transcript Major Hypotheses (continued)

The impact of role stressors, rotating shift
work and job design on job stress: A study
of airline employees in Mainland China
Louise Tourigny
University of Wisconsin-Whitewater
Vishwanath V. Baba
McMaster University
Xiaoyun Wang
University of Manitoba
December 1, 2006
Rollins College, Florida
Program
Occupational Mental Health:
Antecedents and Consequences
Project 1
Prediction and
Modeling of
Mental Health
Project 2
Dynamics of
Occupational
Mental Health
Project 3
Mental Health
Outcomes
Management of Occupational Mental Health
Rational for this Research
• Karasek’s model (D-C) needs further
testing
– Person-environment fit
• Personal characteristics (e.g., Xie, 1996)
– Can decision latitude be too high?
• Rotating shifts versus fixed shifts
• Person-environment fit
– Exacerbating effects of shift work life disruption
Evidence Sustaining this Research
• Baba & Wang (2003) found that when there is a discrepancy
between the actual and preferred schedule, shift work constitutes an
important predictor of occupational mental health
• Jamal & Baba (1992) found that rotating shifts are associated with
higher levels of job stress than fixed shifts
• Barton (1994) found that night shifts were not associated with more
stress for employees who decide to work on night shifts
• Karasek’s demands-control model predicts that when job
demands are high and job control is high employees experience
positive outcomes
• Xie (1996) found statistical evidence among Chinese employees
substantiating Karasek’s model but only for employees with
perceived ability-job fit
Theoretical Framework
•
Mental health is a state of well-being without the stress and its manifest resultants of
anxiety, depression, and burnout precipitated variously by personal, role, job, and
organizational inadequacies.
•
When occupational demands are to be met in the absence of adequate resources and
in the face of serious negative consequences, distress results. This manifests itself
through repeated episodes of high levels of job stress which result in chronic job strain.
The demands-control model predicts that high job demands and low job control will be
associated with high job strain whereas high job demands and high job control will be
associated with positive outcomes.
•
Role stressors – role ambiguity, role conflict and role overload – are important predictors
of job stress, a precursor of job strain.
•
Shift work is disruptive to normal routines of life, causes sleep disturbances associated
with mental and physical health problems
•
Employees who work on shift and did not select their schedule experience a
discrepancy between the actual and preferred schedule
•
Decision latitude and job scope are elements of job control that can moderate the
effects of job demands
•
The person-environment fit determines the extent to which the D-C model offers
effective predictions
Interactive approach to the D-C model
• Interactive approach has proved more
accurate than the additive approach in
testing the D-C model
– Add some contextual exacerbating factors
– Test the moderating effects of decision
latitude and job scope
Major Hypotheses
•
•
•
Barton (1994) found that employees who select to work on shifts experience
more resilience to job stress
Baba & Wang (2003) found that a match between actual and preferred
schedule is associated with less job stress than a discrepancy
Jamal & Baba (1992) found that rotating shifts are associated with higher
levels of job stress
Hypothesis 1: “When employees work on rotating shifts they experience higher job
stress when they report high role stressors in comparison to employees who
work on fixed shifts”
Hypothesis 2: “When employees report greater life disruption associated with shift
work they tend to experience higher job stress when they perceive high role
stressors in comparison to other employees who do not report life disruption”
Major Hypotheses (continued)
•
•
Decision latitude (discretion over decision pertaining to one’s work) is a
psychosocial factor associated with lower job strain
Karasek’s D-C model
Hypothesis 3: “The relationship between role stressors and job stress is
moderated by decision latitude such that when decision latitude is low role
stressors will have a positive effect on job stress”
Major Hypotheses (continued)
•
•
•
•
Xie (1996) found that positive outcomes were associated with high job
demands and high decision latitude for employees with perceived ability-job
fit only
The person-environment fit sustains the proposition that shift work as a
context for job stress may fit better certain employees
Rotating shifts lead to higher levels of job stress because these are
associated with unpredictability of the work
Decision latitude will act as a buffer when there is a fit
Hypothesis 4: “In the context of rotating shift work decision latitude will not have
a buffering effect on the relationship between role stressors and job stress
whereas in the context of fixed shift work decision latitude will have a
buffering effect on these relationships”
Hypothesis 5: “Decision latitude will have a buffering effect on the relationships
between role stressors and job stress only when there is low life disruption
associated with shift work”
Major Hypotheses (continued)
•
Job scope is a motivator
– Experienced meaningfulness of the work
– Responsibility for outcomes
– Feedback
•
•
Job scope is associated with lower anxiety, frustration and emotional
exhaustion (Kelloway & Barling, 1991; Spector & Jex, 1991)
Job scope may be too high when employees work on rotating shifts
especially if they have too high task variety (Xie & Johns, 1995)
Hypothesis 6: “High job scope will moderate the relationship between role
stressors and job stress such that it will prevent an increase in job stress for
employees working on fixed shifts, and provoke an increase in job stress for
employees working on rotating shifts”
Major Hypotheses (continued)
•
•
•
•
High job scope is associated with more responsibilities in the workplace
It requires an adequate work life and family life balance to maintain an
optimal level of well-being
Important life disruption associated with shift work is associated with higher
levels of job stress
High job scope in the context of important life disruption is not likely to
moderate the detrimental effects of role stressors. Indeed, it may be a
source of additional stress
Hypothesis 7: “High job scope will have a buffering effect on the relationship
between role stressors and job stress only when there is low life disruption
associated with shift work. High job scope will further exacerbate the effect
of role stressors on job stress when there is high life disruption associated
with shift work”
Methods
• 485 employees working for a major international airline in Beijing,
Shanghai, Urumqi, Nanjing, and Chengdu
• Pilots (first, second and third), engineers, flight attendants,
mechanical technicians, plane maintenance assistants, and other
service and maintenance employees
• 315 males and 157 females (for 472 responses to this question)
• Age: Between 19 and 60 (mean 32.75 and standard deviation 8.37)
• Procedure: 700 Survey questionnaires, 485 useful questionnaires
were collected (69% response rate).
• Analysis: Descriptive statistics, Correlations, Hierarchical
moderated regression
Measures
•
Role stressors – Role ambiguity, role conflict and role overload
– Beehr, Walsh & Taber (1976)
– Scale from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree)
– Reverse scored items to reflect high role stressors
•
Role ambiguity
– Mean: 2.19
– Standard deviation: .53
•
Role conflict
– Mean: 2.96
– Standard deviation: .65
•
Role overload (3 items pertaining to environmental factors)
– Mean: 3.09
– Standard deviation: .68
Measures (continued…)
•
Decision latitude and job scope
– Beehr et al., 1976
– 5-point scale with 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree)
– Reverse scored so as to reflect high decision latitude and high job scope
•
Decision latitude
– Mean: 3.02
– Standard deviation: 1.09
•
Job scope
– Mean: 3.55
– Standard deviation: .65
•
Fixed or rotating shifts
– Respondents just indicate whether they work on shifts
– Then, if yes, they indicate whether it is on fixed or rotating shifts
Measures (continued…)
•
Shift work disruption
– Folkard (1998) Survey
•
•
•
•
•
3 items
5-point scale with 1 (none at all) to 5 (intolerable amount)
Mean: 2.71
Standard deviation: .97
Job stress
– Parker & Decotiis (1983)
•
•
•
•
•
5-point scale with 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree)
Reverse scored so that a high score indicates high job stress
Mean: 2.89
Standard deviation: .65
Control variables
– Age
– Gender
• 1 for female
• 2 for male
Results
Variable
1. Age
2. Gender 1
3. Role
ambiguity
4. Role
conflict
5. Role
overload
6. Fixed or
rotating
shift 2
7. Shift
work
disruption
8. Decision
latitude
9. Job
scope
10. Stress
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
.13**
-.08
-.08
(.54)
-.02
.16**
.05
(.72)
.12*
.16**
.03
.42**
(.59)
-.05
.09
.01
-.02
.13
-.11
-.13
.09
.12
.07
.04
-.20**
.06
.15**
.03
.10*
8
9
.22**
.14
(.90)
-.23**
-.07
-.25**
-.19**
(.83)
-.19**
.04
.10*
-.03
-.12
.28**
(.62)
.13**
.40**
.60**
.21**
.38**
-.16**
.02
10
(.88)
Results (continued)
Model
Step 1


Step 2


Step 3

1: Moderating effect of fixed or rotating shift
Model
Step 1


Step 2


Step 3

2: Moderating effect of shift work disruption
Model
Step 1


Step 2



Step 3



Step 4

3: Moderating effect of decision latitude
ΔR2
.00
β
-.05
-.02
Age
Gender
.45**
.65**
.13*
Role overload
Fixed or rotating shift
.06**
1.49**
Role overload X Fixed or rotating shift
ΔR2
.00
β
-.00
-.04
Age
Gender
.44**
.56**
.26**
Role overload
Shift work disruption
.02*
.70*
Role overload X Shift work disruption
ΔR2
.00
β
-.05
-.02
Age
Gender
.46**
.64**
.10
-.11
Role overload
Fixed or rotating shift
Decision latitude
.06**
1.39**
-.21
-.02
Role overload X Fixed or rotating shift
Role overload X Decision latitude
Decision latitude X Fixed or rotating shift
.01*
Role overload X Fixed or rotating shift X Decision
latitude
2.72*
Results (continued)
Figure 1
Moderating effect of fixed or rotating shift
Rotating
shift
Stress
Fixed
shift
Role overload
Figure 2
Moderating effect of shift work disruption
High shift work
disruption
Stress
Low shift work
disruption
Role overload
Results (continued)
Figure 3a
Moderating effect of decision latitude: Fixed shift
Low decision
latitude
Stress
High decision
latitude
Role overload
Figure 3b
Moderating effect of decision latitude: Rotating shift
High decision
latitude
Stress
Low decision
latitude
Role overload
Discussion
•
•
•
•
•
Rotating shift work exacerbates the positive effect of role overload on job
stress
Life disruption associated with shift work exacerbates the positive effect of
role overload on job stress
Decision latitude alleviates the effect of role overload on job stress only for
employees working on fixed shifts
Decision latitude can actually exacerbate the effect of role overload on job
stress when employees work on rotating shifts
High demands and high decision latitude is effective for employees working
on fixed shift but not for employees working on rotating shifts
– Too high demands
– Decision latitude perceived as an additional demand
Implications
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Job enlargement versus job enrichment
Skill variety may not be suitable for rotating shifts
Decision latitude is contextually bounded
Structure and organizational support should not be neglected elements
Predictability of workloads and workplace events may come into play
Rotating shifts are associated with less predictability
Increasing decision latitude when there is low predictability may actually
increase confusion and job pressure
Need to study coping strategies of employees working on rotating shifts
Need to determine how organizations can compensate for excessive job
demands
Need to pursue interventionist studies