Individual differences and changes in personality during the covid-19 pandemic

This article reports the results of an eleven-wave longitudinal study of personality change conducted between December 2019 and December 2022 with 1328 participants in Germany. Based on theories of personality change, we investigated trajectories of big five personality factors (i.e., extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness) across the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, we examined whether demographic characteristics (i.e., age, sex), self-reported health status (i.e., physical, mental), and socioeconomic status (i.e., education, income, industry) moderated these trajectories. There was evidence for increases in extraversion, conscientiousness, and emotional stability and decreases in openness across time. The magnitude of these effects suggests between d = 0.027 to 0.138 standard deviation changes in these personality characteristics across the 3-year timeframe of this study. Evidence for moderating effects of age, sex, health, and socioeconomic status was mixed, but indicates differential patterns of personality change for certain individuals. Overall, findings suggest that changes in big five personality factors across the COVID-19 were present, albeit on average relatively weak, but still higher than anticipated given the timeframe. Moreover, certain demographic and health variables were associated with differential trajectories of personality over time. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Tough times at the top: Occupational status predicts changes in job satisfaction in times of crisis.

How do individuals with a higher versus lower occupational status experience major, unexpected changes to their work life? The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted most areas of work life and, thus, provides a unique opportunity to examine changes in work attitudes in response to a worldwide crisis. We predict that individuals with higher, but not with lower occupational status showed a decline in job satisfaction during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany (1st lockdown; March to May 2020), with subsequent recovery to initial job satisfaction levels. Based on role theory and social-psychological theories of hierarchical differentiation, we argue that, due to the profound work-related changes, individuals with higher (vs. lower) occupational status are more negatively affected in realizing their work goals and, thus, experience decreasing levels of job satisfaction. To test these predictions, we investigated trajectories of job satisfaction between December 2019 and August 2020 (7 measurement waves; N = 1583). Results of piece-wise growth curve models showed that individuals with higher occupational status showed a steeper decline in job satisfaction (followed by recovery) over time, whereas individuals with medium and lower occupational status did not experience a significant change in job satisfaction. In addition, we show that the decline in job satisfaction is moderated by perceived constraints at work associated with the pandemic among individuals with higher occupational status. Overall, these findings contribute to our understanding of the link between occupational status and job satisfaction in times of crisis.

Short-Term Effects of Short-Term Work: Dynamics in Fatigue Across Two National Lockdowns.

OBJECTIVE: Anecdotal evidence suggests work fatigue has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, and work interventions to offset stresses have been effective. Our study sought to test these propositions, documenting and describing the complexity of worker well-being around two lockdown periods. METHODS: Using 17 waves of data from a longitudinal study in Germany (December 2019 to June 2021, n = 1053 employees), we model discontinuous changes in work fatigue and how participation in a government-sponsored short-term work program (Kurzarbeit) affected change trajectories. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic has not invariably resulted in work fatigue, and individuals with Kurzarbeit at the first lockdown (but not the second) showed significantly larger decreases in each form of fatigue at this transition. CONCLUSIONS: Future policy interventions will require more contextual nuance and to effectively support worker well-being during public health crises.

Age-Differentiated Leadership and Healthy Aging at Work: Evidence from the Early Stages of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Little is known about the relative influence of age-differentiated leadership on healthy aging at work. Likewise, the age-conditional influence of age-differentiated leadership is understudied, and especially so in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a three-wave longitudinal study, we examined the role that age-differentiated leadership plays in the prediction of work ability, as measured three times over six months (n = 1130) during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany (i.e., December 2019, March 2020, and June 2020). The results suggest that although there were no systematic changes in work ability on average, there was notable within-person variability in work ability over time. Additionally, we find that a balanced approach to age-differentiated leadership that considers the needs of both older and younger employees matters most and complements the positive influence of leader-member exchange for predicting within-person variability in work ability. We also find that older employees' work ability benefits from an approach to age-differentiated leadership that considers older employee's needs, whereas younger employees' work ability especially benefits from leader-member exchange and a balanced approach to age-differentiated leadership. Overall, these results provide initial support for the idea that an age-differentiated approach to leadership is important when considering healthy aging at work.

Researching employee experiences and behavior in times of crisis: Theoretical and methodological considerations and implications for human resource management

Over the past 2?years, numerous empirical studies in the fields of human resource management, organizational behavior, and industrial, work, and organizational psychology have investigated employee experiences and behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. The goal of this paper is to take a step back and to outline several theoretical and methodological considerations when researching employee experiences and behavior in times of crisis more generally. These insights may be useful when developing conceptual models, designing empirical studies, and managing people in the context of future crises. We first review theoretical approaches that could be applied to explain changes in employee experiences and behavior in times of crisis, including stress theories, theories of adjustment to work-related changes, career construction theory, event system theory, transition-adaptation theories, the crisis management and resilience framework, and the social identity model of identity change. Second, we outline methodological considerations and best practices regarding the research design of quantitative empirical studies, sampling, measurement, and analytic strategies. Throughout, we highlight empirical studies on employee experiences and behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic that have adopted these theoretical approaches and methodological best practices. We conclude with several suggestions for future theory development and empirical studies on employee experiences and behavior as well as human resource management in times of crisis.

Pandemics: Implications for research and practice in industrial and organizational psychology

Pandemics have historically shaped the world of work in various ways. With COVID-19 presenting as a global pandemic, there is much speculation about the implications of this crisis for the future of work and for people working in organizations. In this article, we discuss 10 of the most relevant research and practice topics in the field of industrial and organizational psychology that will likely be strongly influenced by COVID-19. For each of these topics, the pandemic crisis is creating new work-related challenges, but it is also presenting various opportunities. The topics discussed herein include occupational health and safety, work–family issues, telecommuting, virtual teamwork, job insecurity, precarious work, leadership, human resources policy, the aging workforce, and careers. This article sets the stage for further discussion of various ways in which I-O psychology research and practice can address the issues that COVID-19 creates for work and organizational processes that are affecting workers now and will shape the future of work and organizations in both the short and long term. This article concludes by inviting I-O psychology researchers and practitioners to address the challenges and opportunities of COVID-19 head-on by proactively adapting the work that we do in support of workers, organizations, and society as a whole.

Big Five traits as predictors of perceived stressfulness of the COVID-19 pandemic.

This study examined the Big Five personality traits as predictors of individual differences and changes in the perceived stressfulness of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany between early April 2020 and early September 2020. This timeframe includes the first national "lockdown," the period of "easing" of restrictions, and the summer vacation period. Data were collected from n = 588 full-time employees, who provided baseline data on their personality traits in early December 2019, and then later provided data on perceived stressfulness of the COVID-19 pandemic at five time points, spanning six months. Consistent with expectations based on event and transition theories, results showed that, on average, perceived stressfulness declined between early April 2020 and early September 2020. Moreover, this effect was stronger between early April 2020 and early July 2020. Hypotheses based on the differential reactivity model of personality and stress were partially supported. Emotional stability was associated with lower, and extraversion associated with higher, average levels of perceived stressfulness. Finally, extraversion was associated with increases (i.e., positive trajectories) in perceived stressfulness between early April 2020 and early July 2020 and decreases (i.e., negative trajectories) in perceived stressfulness between early July 2020 and early September 2020.

COVID-19 and the workplace: Implications, issues, and insights for future research and action.

The impacts of COVID-19 on workers and workplaces across the globe have been dramatic. This broad review of prior research rooted in work and organizational psychology, and related fields, is intended to make sense of the implications for employees, teams, and work organizations. This review and preview of relevant literatures focuses on (a) emergent changes in work practices (e.g., working from home, virtual teamwork) and (b) emergent changes for workers (e.g., social distancing, stress, and unemployment). In addition, potential moderating factors (demographic characteristics, individual differences, and organizational norms) are examined given the likelihood that COVID-19 will generate disparate effects. This broad-scope overview provides an integrative approach for considering the implications of COVID-19 for work, workers, and organizations while also identifying issues for future research and insights to inform solutions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Individual differences and changes in subjective wellbeing during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has considerably impacted many people's lives. This study examined changes in subjective wellbeing between December 2019 and May 2020 and how stress appraisals and coping strategies relate to individual differences and changes in subjective wellbeing during the early stages of the pandemic. Data were collected at 4 time points from 979 individuals in Germany. Results showed that, on average, life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect did not change significantly between December 2019 and March 2020 but decreased between March and May 2020. Across the latter timespan, individual differences in life satisfaction were positively related to controllability appraisals, active coping, and positive reframing, and negatively related to threat and centrality appraisals and planning. Positive affect was positively related to challenge and controllable-by-self appraisals, active coping, using emotional support, and religion, and negatively related to threat appraisal and humor. Negative affect was positively related to threat and centrality appraisals, denial, substance use, and self-blame, and negatively related to controllability appraisals and emotional support. Contrary to expectations, the effects of stress appraisals and coping strategies on changes in subjective wellbeing were small and mostly nonsignificant. These findings imply that the COVID-19 pandemic represents not only a major medical and economic crisis, but also has a psychological dimension, as it can be associated with declines in key facets of people's subjective wellbeing. Psychological practitioners should address potential declines in subjective wellbeing with their clients and attempt to enhance clients' general capability to use functional stress appraisals and effective coping strategies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

COVID-19 and careers: On the futility of generational explanations.

It is common to broadly group people of different ages into "generations" and to speak of distinctions between such groups in terms of "generational differences." The problem with this practice, is that there exists no credible scientific evidence that (a) generations exist, (b) that people can be reliably classified into generational groups, and (c) that there are demonstrable differences between such groups. We have already noted an emerging generationalized rhetoric that has characterized how people of different ages have been affected by and reacted to the COVID-19 pandemic. These narratives have been especially present in discussions of how work and careers will be affected by this crisis. In this essay, we outline problems with applying the concept of generations, especially for researchers seeking explanations for how COVID-19 will affect careers and career development. We urge researchers to eschew the notion of generations and generational differences and consider alternative lifespan development theoretical frameworks that better capture age-graded processes.

“The COVID-19 Generation”: A Cautionary Note

<p>With COVID-19 presenting as a global pandemic, we have noticed an emerging rhetoric concerning “the COVID-19 Generation,” both anecdotally and across various media outlets. The narratives advanced to support such rhetoric have distinct implications for the study of work, aging, and retirement. In this commentary, we review this emerging issue and present evidence against attempts to define “the COVID-19 Generation” as a new construct along conceptual, methodological, as well as practical lines, with a specific focus on identifying real dangers associated with investigating and potentially managing a new generation associated with this pandemic. We strongly caution against the adoption of “the COVID-19 Generation” as a concept of study and instead offer several suggestions to researchers, organizations, and practitioners seeking answers to complicated questions about links between COVID-19 and various processes relevant to work, aging, and retirement during this time of uncertainty.</p>