Modeling negative affectivity and job stress: a contingency‐based approach

Abstract

SummaryUnderstanding the role of negative affectivity (NA) in relations between job stressors and resultant strains has been a major source of research interest in the organizational literature for almost two decades. In this study, we propose a contingency approach, whereby the role of NA depends on the nature of the strain construct under investigation. Specifically, we predicted that perceived job stressors would fully mediate the relationship between NA and turnover intentions, while job stressors would only partially mediate the relationship between NA and job and life satisfaction, and job stressors would be unrelated to depression once NA was taken into account. The relative fit of these four models is tested utilizing data from two divergent samples (sales representatives and managers) employing both self-and informant reports of strain measures where feasible. Hypotheses regarding the specified nature of the NA ! stressor ! strain relationship generally were supported and replicated across samples. In addition, an alternate model specifying that NA moderates the relationship between stressors and strains was not supported for any strain variable.

On the role of positive and negative affectivity in job performance: A meta-analytic investigation.

“…In addition, these individuals' heightened distress from negative workplace events (e.g., Barsky, et al, 2004) also should hamper desires to persevere or sacrifice in order to achieve superior performance. Thus, these negative subjective evaluations should directly lead to poorer task performance.…”

The role of entrepreneurs in firm-level innovation: Joint effects of positive affect, creativity, and environmental dynamism

“…The PANAS scale has been used to assess respondents' general feelings and emotions (i.e., how they feel on the average) in prior research (e.g., Barsky et al, 2004;Watson et al, 1988). Although the full PANAS scale gauges both positive and negative affectivity, it has also been adapted to measure each of these dimensions separately.…”

“…For example, Fritz and Sonnentag (2009) employed the 10 positive affect items in their study of proactive behavior and positive affect. Similarly, Barsky et al (2004) utilized the 10 negative affect items to investigate the relationship between negative affect and job stress. Because our concern was primarily with dispositional positive affect, we used the 10-item positive affect scale from the PANAS and asked respondents to indicate the extent to which they generally (across situations and time) experienced various feelings and emotions (e.g., active, enthusiastic, excited).…”

Emotional labour and its outcomes: a study of a Philippine call centre

“…There are considerable individual differences in terms of what might constitute a work stressor, with one job characteristic considered a stressor for one employee, an insignificant point for the next, or a source of motivation for a third (Selye, 1978;Barsky et al, 2004). This individual difference in the responses to job characteristics makes it difficult to directly study the effects of work stressors and is the cause of much debate in the stress literature.…”