Recovery from work‐related effort: A meta‐analysis

Abstract

Summary This meta‐analytic study examines the antecedents and outcomes of four recovery experiences: psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery, and control. Using 299 effect sizes from 54 independent samples (N = 26,592), we extend theory by integrating recovery experiences into the challenge–hindrance framework, creating a more comprehensive understanding of how both after‐work recovery and work characteristics collectively relate to well‐being. The results of meta‐analytic path estimates indicate that challenge demands have stronger negative relationships with psychological detachment, relaxation, and control recovery experiences than hindrance demands, and job resources have positive relationships with relaxation, mastery, and control recovery experiences. Psychological detachment after work has a stronger negative relationship with fatigue than relaxation or control experiences, whereas control experiences after work have a stronger positive relationship with vigor than detachment or relaxation experiences. Additionally, a temporally driven model with recovery experiences as a partial mediator explains up to 62% more variance in outcomes (ΔR2 = .12) beyond work characteristics models, implying that both work characteristics and after‐work recovery play an important role in determining employee well‐being.

Testing cross‐lagged relationships between work‐related rumination and well‐being at work in a three‐wave longitudinal study across 1 and 2 years

“…Without detachment, the energy loss cycle continues as resources are not replenished during off-job time, suggesting an increase in exhaustion and a decrease in vigour in the long term. Two recent meta-analyses (Bennett et al, 2018;Wendsche & Lohmann-Haislah, 2017) and one review (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2015) showed that detachment is systematically associated with less exhaustion and more vigour and the relationship may be stronger with fatigue (including exhaustion) than vigour. To date, two longitudinal studies have shown that lack of psychological detachment from work predicted an increase in job exhaustion over the course of 1 year (Sianoja et al, 2018;Sonnentag et al, 2010).…”

“…It has been consistently suggested that insufficient recovery from work, especially over extended periods of time, results in resource depletion and impairs employees’ well‐being (Cropley & Zijlstra, ; Geurts & Sonnentag, ; Sonnentag, Venz, & Casper, ). However, longitudinal evidence on these expected long‐term detrimental effects on employee well‐being is scarce, as the current knowledge base mainly consists of findings from cross‐sectional studies together with diary studies (see Bennett, Bakker, & Field, ; Wendsche & Lohmann‐Haislah, , for meta‐analyses). This is an important research gap; only longitudinal research encompassing prolonged time periods can provide appropriate information about the (lagged) associations between recovery and employee well‐being.…”

“…effects on employee well-being is scarce, as the current knowledge base mainly consists of findings from cross-sectional studies together with diary studies (see Bennett, Bakker, & Field, 2018;Wendsche & Lohmann-Haislah, 2017, for metaanalyses). This is an important research gap; only longitudinal research encompassing prolonged time periods can provide appropriate information about the (lagged) associations between recovery and employee well-being.…”

The Role of Trait and State Perfectionism in Psychological Detachment From Daily Job Demands

“…Despite considerable empirical support for the direct effects between demands, psychological detachment, and strain proposed by the SD model at the between‐persons level (see Bennett, Bakker, & Field, ; Wendsche & Lohmann‐Haislah, , for reviews), the number of studies that have specifically examined the proposed mediating effects of psychological detachment is still limited (Sonnentag & Fritz, ; Sonnentag, Kuttler, & Fritz, ). Moreover, there is only limited knowledge about the role of personal characteristics for the relations between job stressors, psychological detachment, and strain.…”

Challenge and hindrance demands in relation to self‐reported job performance and the role of restoration, sleep quality, and affective rumination

“…Moreover, challenge (e.g., workload, cognitive demands) and hindrance (e.g., job insecurity) demands have previously been related to high affective rumination, lower psychological detachment from work during off‐job time, and greater need for recovery (Höge, Sora, Weber, Peiró, & Caballer, ; Kinnunen, Mauno, & Siltaloppi, ; Kinnunen et al ., ). A recent meta‐analysis has shown that especially challenge demands relate to poor detachment from work during off‐job time (Bennett, Bakker, & Field, ), which may refer to affective rumination. Hence, the most likely response of an employee faced with high challenge job demands and high job insecurity is not to adequately detach from work, but to continue a mental connection to work, which may be associated with physiological activation (Sonnentag & Fritz, ) to some extent preventing psychophysiological recovery.…”