Managing work, family, and school roles: Disengagement strategies can help and hinder.

Abstract

The extent to which individuals manage multiple role domains has yet to be fully understood. We advance past research by examining the effect of interrole conflict among three very common and critically important life roles-work, family, and school-on three corresponding types of satisfaction. Further, we examine individual-based techniques that can empower people to manage multiple roles. In doing so, we integrate the disengagement strategies from the work recovery and coping literatures. These strategies focus on taking your mind off the problems at hand and include cognitive disengagement (psychological detachment, cognitive avoidance coping), as well as cognitive distortion (escape avoidance coping). We examine these strategies in a two-wave study of 178 individuals faced with the challenge of managing work, family, and school responsibilities. Findings demonstrated a joint offsetting effect of psychological detachment and cognitive avoidance coping on the relationship between work conflict and work satisfaction. Findings also indicated an exacerbating effect of escape avoidance coping on the relationship between work conflict and work satisfaction, school conflict and school satisfaction, and between family conflict and family satisfaction. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

General mental ability, conscientiousness, and the work–family interface: A test of mediating pathways

“…Finally, the use of avoidance coping may not allow individuals to anticipate or proactively monitor possible time conflict between different life domains. As past research has suggested that this coping style is more likely to impact conflict than enrichment (Cheng & McCarthy, ; see also Carver & Scheier, ), we do not expect a direct effect of avoidance coping on work–family enrichment. These arguments, in combination with the proposed negative relationships between GMA/conscientiousness and avoidance coping, lead us to predict: Hypothesis 7 :(a) GMA/(b) conscientiousness has a negative indirect effect on work–family conflict mediated through avoidance coping styles. …”

“…We propose that individuals who are high on GMA and conscientiousness are more likely to use problem coping and eschew the use of ineffective coping styles such as avoidance coping (Connor‐Smith & Flachsbart, ). Based on the differential salience perspective, the use of problem coping may allow individuals to better manage demands and optimize resource utilization, resulting in less conflict and more enrichment (Cheng & McCarthy, ; Folkman & Moskowitz, ). In contrast, the use of avoidance coping may leave stressors unresolved thereby allowing them to spill over across domains and increase work–family conflict.…”

“…Thus, avoidance coping may exacerbate the experience of stress and deplete resources thereby increasing the level of work–family conflict (Ingledew, Hardy, & Cooper, ). Second, individuals who regularly use avoidance coping will often fail to remove the challenges and obstacles that cause them stress, making it more likely that the strain in one role may decrease their functioning in the other role (Cheng & McCarthy, ). Finally, the use of avoidance coping may not allow individuals to anticipate or proactively monitor possible time conflict between different life domains.…”

Hardworking coworkers: A multilevel cross‐national look at group work hours and work–family conflict

“…WFC was measured using four of the items in the five‐item scale developed by Netemeyer, Boles, and McMurrian (). Sample items include the following: “The demands of my work interfere with my home and personal/family life” and “My job produces strain that makes it difficult to fulfill personal/family duties.” Due to concerns about survey length and consistent with previous research (e.g., Cheng & McCarthy, ), we removed one item from the survey: “Things I want to do at home do not get done because of the demands my job puts on me.” The scale was administered on a 5‐point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree ). The average reliability of the scale across countries was calculated as 0.88, which ranged between 0.73 (Korea) and 0.93 (Russia).…”

Association of stress coping strategies with Internet addiction in college students: The moderating effect of depression

“…Disengagement strategies include cognitive avoidance, psychological detachment, and cognitive distortion [46].…”