Assessing stress at work: A framework and an instrument. In O. Svane & C. Johanses (Eds.), Work and health -Scientific basis of progress in the working environment (pp. 105-113). Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Sluiter, J. K., Frings-Dresen, M. H. W., van der Beek, A. J., & Meijman, T. F. (2001). The relation between work-induced neuroendocrine reactivity and recovery, subjective need for recovery, and health status.

No abstract

In previous research on psychological stress recovery, recovery activities and recovery experiences have been studied separately rather than jointly. The present study advances previous knowledge about stress recovery by integrating the effects of these separate recovery constructs within a single study and examining them outside the work context. We propose and test an integrated model of the stress-recovery process that includes weekday stressors and weekend recovery activity behaviors, psychological recovery experiences, and recovery outcomes. Undergraduates (n ϭ 221) from a Midwestern university reported on Friday about stressors experienced during the week, followed by a weekend during which recovery could occur. On Monday they reported their weekend activities and their current well-being. Results suggest that participating in specific recovery activities during a weekend and accompanying specific subjective recovery experiences reduce negative psychological outcomes. Future research and practical applications of the integrated model of the recovery process are discussed.

The mean of self-report and observer ratings of working conditions was used to predict 3 types of well-being in 52 young workers: general well-being, job-related well-being, and spillover from work to nonwork domains. Longitudinally, job control predicted spillover. There was no strong evidence for reverse causation. Synchronously, Time 2 job stressors predicted all types of well-being, and job control predicted general well-being. Because dependent variables at Time 1 are controlled for, this indicates short-term effects. Results for stressors are in line with a stress reaction model, indicating a rather quick symptom development but reversibility. The effect of control on spillover, however, suggests a sleeper effect model, with symptoms appearing with delay.

This study investigates the link between workplace stress and the 'non-singularity' of patient safety-related incidents in the hospital setting. Over a period of 2 working weeks 23 young nurses from 19 hospitals in Switzerland documented 314 daily stressful events using a self-observation method (pocket diaries); 62 events were related to patient safety. Familiarity of safety-related events and probability of recurrence, as indicators of non-singularity, were the dependent variables in multilevel regression analyses. Predictor variables were both situational (self-reported situational control, safety compliance) and chronic variables (job stressors such as time pressure, or concentration demands and job control). Chronic work characteristics were rated by trained observers. The most frequent safety-related stressful events included incomplete or incorrect documentation (40.3%), medication errors (near misses 21%), delays in delivery of patient care (9.7%), and violent patients (9.7%). Familiarity of events and probability of recurrence were significantly predicted by chronic job stressors and low job control in multilevel regression analyses. Job stressors and low job control were shown to be risk factors for patient safety. The results suggest that job redesign to enhance job control and decrease job stressors may be an important intervention to increase patient safety.