Quantifying the evidence for the absence of the job demands and job control interaction on workers' well-being: A Bayesian meta-analysis.

Central to many influential theories in the occupational health and stress literature is that job resources reduce the negative effects of job demands on workers' well-being. However, empirical investigations testing this supposition have produced inconsistent findings. This study evaluates the interaction between job demands and job control on workers' well-being through a systematic literature search and using a Bayesian meta-analytic approach. Both aggregated study findings and raw participant-level data were included in the study, resulting in 104 effect sizes of aggregate-level data and 14 participant-level data sets. Overall, the data provided strong evidence for the absence of an interaction between job demands and job control. Longitudinal and nonlinear research designs were also examined but did not alter this overall conclusion. Contrary to the postulations of widespread theories, job control does not reduce the negative impact of job demands on workers' well-being. Alternative theoretical approaches and the need for more consistent and rigorous research standards, like open science practices, are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The nonlinear effects of job complexity and autonomy on job satisfaction, turnover, and psychological well-being.

This study examines the interactive relationship between job complexity and job autonomy on job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and psychological well-being. It was hypothesized that the positive or motivating effects of job complexity are only realized when workers are given enough autonomy to effectively meet the challenges of complex jobs. Results show that not only do job complexity and job autonomy interact, but that the relationships to the outcome variables are curvilinear in form. Job complexity is shown to be both a motivator and a stressor when job autonomy is low. However, the most beneficial effects of job complexity occur when it is matched by a high level of job autonomy. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

A two-dimensional model that employs explicit and implicit attitudes to characterize prejudice.

In the authors' 2-dimensional model of prejudice, explicit and implicit attitudes are used to create 4 profiles: truly low prejudiced (TLP: double lows), aversive racists (AR: low explicit modern racism/high implicit prejudice), principled conservatives (PC: high explicit modern racism/low implicit prejudice), and modern racists (MR: double highs). Students completed an Asian Modern Racism Scale and an Asian/White Implicit Association Test. The authors compared the 4 groups' prejudice-related ideologies (i.e., egalitarianism/humanism and social conservatism) and economic/political conservatism (Study 1, N=132). The authors also tested whether MR but not PC (Study 2, N=65) and AR but not TLP (Study 3, N=143) are more likely to negatively evaluate an Asian target when attributional ambiguity is high (vs. low). In support of the model, TLP did not hold prejudice-related ideologies and did not discriminate; AR were low in conservatism and demonstrated the attributional-ambiguity effect; PC did not strongly endorse prejudice-related ideologies and did not discriminate; MR strongly endorsed prejudice-related ideologies, were conservative, and demonstrated the attributional-ambiguity effect. The authors discuss implications for operationalizing and understanding the nature of prejudice.