ABSTRACT
The negative emotional and health effects of work-life conflict (WLC) have been demonstrated in numerous studies regarding organizational psychology and occupational health. However, little is known about WLC's relationship with positive wellbeing outcomes, including emotional, psychological, and social aspects of workers' thriving. Furthermore, the mediating processes underlying the effects of WLC remain mostly unknown. The current study investigated the associations of perceived time- and strain-based WLC with positive mental health and thriving at work, as well as the mediating role of mindfulness in these associations. It is argued that WLC causes reduced mindfulness capacities among workers, which is in turn associated with lower positive wellbeing given the importance of mindfulness in emotion regulation. A sample of 330 workers based in Québec, Canada, completed an online survey including a measure of strain- and time-based interference with personal projects (i.e., the goals and activities that define the daily life of an individual) and validated scales of wellbeing outcomes and mindfulness. Results of structural equation modeling revealed negative associations between time- and strain-based WLC with positive mental health and thriving at work. Work-life conflict was related to lower mindfulness, which played a mediating role in the associations between time-based WLC with positive mental health and thriving at work, as well as strain-based WLC with positive mental health. The mediation was complete for the time-based WLC and positive mental health association, but partial for the other mediated pathways, highlighting the need for more research to identify additional mediators. These results highlight that beyond resulting in negative emotional/health outcomes often studied in previous research, WLC may be associated with workers' reduced potential to live a fulfilling life, in general and in the workplace. Recommendations (e.g., mindfulness intervention to promote emotional regulation, personal project intervention) for workplace policymakers and practitioners are identified.
ABSTRACT
Research highlights several risk and resilience factors at multiple ecological levels that influence individuals' mental health and wellbeing in their everyday lives and, more specifically, in disaster or outbreak situations. However, there is limited research on the role of these factors in the early days of the COVID-19 crisis. The present study examined if and how potential risk factors (i.e., reduction in income, job insecurity, feelings of vulnerability to contracting the virus, lack of confidence in avoiding COVID-19, compliance with preventative policies) and resilience factors (i.e., trait resilience, family functioning, social support, social participation, and trust in healthcare institutions) are associated with mental health and well-being outcomes, and whether these resilience factors buffer (i.e., moderate) the associations between risk factors and said outcomes. One to two weeks after the government recommended preventative measures, 1,122 Canadian workers completed an online questionnaire, including multiple wellbeing outcome scales in addition to measures of potential risk and resilience factors. Structural equation models were tested, highlighting that overall, the considered risk factors were associated with poorer wellbeing outcomes, except social distancing which was associated with lower levels of stress. Each of the potential resilience factors was found to have a main effect on one or more of the wellbeing outcomes. Moderation analysis indicated that in general these resilience factors did not, however, buffer the risk factors. The findings confirm that the COVID-19 crisis encompasses several stressors related to the virus as well as to its impact on one's social, occupational, and financial situation, which put people at risk for lower wellbeing as early as one to two weeks after the crisis began. While several resilience factors emerged as positively related to wellbeing, such factors may not be enough, or sufficiently activated at that time, to buffer the effects of the numerous life changes required by COVID-19. From an ecological perspective, while mental health professionals and public health decision-makers should offer/design services directly focused on mental health and wellbeing, it is important they go beyond celebrating individuals' inner potential for resilience, and also support individuals in activating their environmental resources during a pandemic.
