ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic introduced changes in people's lives that affected their mental health. Our study aimed to explore the level of psychological distress in the academic population during the lockdown period and investigate its association with the new working or studying conditions. The study sample included 9364 students and 2159 employees from five Italian universities from the study IO CONTO 2020. We applied linear regression models to investigate the association between home learning or remote working conditions and psychological distress, separately for students and employees. Psychological distress was assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). In both students and employees, higher levels of distress were significantly associated with study/work–family conflicts, concerns about their future careers, and inadequacy of equipment;in employees, higher levels of distress were significantly associated with a lack of clarity on work objectives. Our results are in line with previous research on the impact of spaces and equipment in remote working/studying from home. Moreover, the study contributes to deepening the association between well-being and telework–family conflict, which in the literature is still equivocal. Practical implications require academic governance to promote sustainable environments both in remote and hybrid work conditions, by referring to a specific management by objectives approach.
ABSTRACT
The present study provides evidence for a valid and reliable tool, the Academic Quality at Work Tool (AQ@workT), to investigate the quality of life at work in academics within the Italian university sector. The AQ@workT was developed by the QoL@Work research team, namely a group of expert academics in the field of work and organizational psychology affiliated with the Italian Association of Psychologists. The tool is grounded in the job demands-resources model and its psychometric properties were assessed in three studies comprising a wide sample of lecturers, researchers, and professors: a pilot study (N = 120), a calibration study (N = 1084), and a validation study (N = 1481). Reliability and content, construct, and nomological validity were supported, as well as measurement invariance across work role (researchers, associate professors, and full professors) and gender. Evidence from the present study shows that the AQ@workT represents a useful and reliable tool to assist university management to enhance quality of life, to manage work-related stress, and to mitigate the potential for harm to academics, particularly during a pandemic. Future studies, such as longitudinal tests of the AQ@workT, should test predictive validity among the variables in the tool.