When minor insecurities project large shadows: A profile analysis of cognitive and affective job insecurity.

People are generally thought to worry about potential job loss to the extent to which they view job loss as likely to occur. However, might there be some individuals for whom job loss may be so detrimental that they experience high levels of worry even if they view job loss as less likely? To answer this question, the present study leveraged research on future-oriented cognition to investigate profiles of cognitive and affective job insecurity (JI). We examined how economic job dependency relates to different profiles of JI experiences as well as the implications of these profiles for understanding heterogeneity in work strain. Latent profile analysis using the U.S. International Social Survey Program data set, and replicated in the U.K. data set, revealed three profiles: Employees who are secure in their role and do not worry about potential job loss (secure alignment profile), those who worry significantly about job loss despite perceiving minimal job threats (affective JI misalignment profile), and employees who worry to some extent and perceive minimal job threats (ambivalent JI alignment profile). As anticipated, several economic job dependence factors (perceived employability and education) were predictors of profile membership. Further, those in the affective JI misalignment profile reported the greatest amount of strain. We discuss our results in terms of implications for JI theory and organizational practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

A Review of the Challenge-Hindrance Stress Model: Recent Advances, Expanded Paradigms, and Recommendations for Future Research.

Since its introduction approximately 20 years ago, the Challenge-Hindrance Stress Model (CHM) has been widely accepted both among academic and practitioner audiences. The model posits that workplace stressors can be grouped into two categories. Hindrance stressors will interfere with performance or goals, while challenge stressors contribute to performance opportunities. These two categories of stressors are theorized to exhibit differential relationships with strain, with hindrance stressors being more consistently linked to psychological, physical, or behavioral strain compared to challenge stressors. Despite the popularity of this model, recent evidence suggests that the proposed differential relationship hypothesis has not consistently held true for all types of strain. Thus, a reexamination or modification of this paradigm is clearly warranted. In the present review, we describe existing evidence surrounding the CHM and describe the rationale for a shifting paradigm. We outline recent advances in research using the CHM, such as novel moderators and mediators, the need to explicitly measure challenge and hindrance appraisal and differentiate between hindrance and threat appraisal, the dynamic nature of these appraisals over time, and the recognition that a single stressor could be appraised simultaneously as both a challenge and a hindrance. Finally, we provide recommendations and future research directions for scholars examining stress and stress management through a CHM lens, including recommendations related to study design, the measurement of stressors, the integration of CHM with other models of stress, and interventions for stress management.

Looking forward: How anticipated workload change influences the present workload-emotional strain relationship.

Many workers experience ebbs and flows of workload in concert with busy seasons, changing project demands, and changes to the way tasks are completed. The present study examined how anticipating workload changes influences emotional strain resulting from current workload. We extend conservation of resources theory (Hobfoll, 1989) by hypothesizing that anticipated changes in workload may be viewed as a future opportunity to recover from current workload (in the case of anticipated workload decrease) or as a threat of loss of resources (in the case of anticipated workload increase), and that anticipated changes in workload would moderate the current workload-emotional strain relationship. Using a sample of employees engaged in project-based work, we found that anticipation of a workload increase exacerbated the current workload-emotional strain relationship and anticipation of a workload decrease buffered this relationship. The results suggest that stressor-strain relations may be influenced by anticipated change in stressor conditions. In other words, employees are more likely to tolerate stressful circumstances if they see the proverbial "light at the end of the tunnel." Implications for occupational stress research and practice are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).