The long arm of time pressure at work: Cognitive failure and commuting near-accidents

Commuting spillover: A systematic review and agenda for research

“…Heightened work demands appear to associate with unsafe commuting, although mechanisms to explain this relationship have differed across studies. Elfering et al (2012, 2013) have suggested a cognitively based mechanism for commuting spillover, showing that workload and time pressure relate to impaired commuting safety via workplace cognitive failures (cognitive errors extending from failures of attention, memory, and motor function on routine tasks; Wallace & Chen, 2005). In contrast, Turgeman‐Lupo and Biron (2017) have posited a normative‐based explanation for commuting spillover, showing that higher abusive supervision and work–family conflict influence unsafe commuting by facilitating the development of permissive commuting safety norms.…”

“…The inclusion of a single mediator in each of these studies precludes a relative comparison of different mechanisms that may underlie work demand–unsafe commuting links. Moreover, because unsafe commuting has been operationalized differently across studies (e.g., accidents and near accidents vs. unsafe commuting behaviors; Elfering et al, 2013; Turgeman‐Lupo & Biron, 2017), it is possible that different mechanisms may be more or less relevant to predicting specific manifestations of unsafe commuting. Longitudinal studies incorporating varied indicators of unsafe commuting and corresponding competing mediators would be particularly helpful to unraveling this process.…”

“…When considering findings that appear relatively consistent across levels, perhaps the most consistently observed commuting spillover relationship is the association of work demands with commuting safety. This relationship has been investigated and supported at between‐ and within‐person levels of analysis using a range of work demands (e.g., workload, time pressure, challenge stressors, long work hours, abusive supervision) and commuting safety indicators (e.g., commuting accidents and near accidents, unsafe commuting behaviors, permissive commuting norms) (Anderson et al, 2018; Calderwood & Ackerman, 2019; Dorrian et al, 2008; Elfering et al, 2012, 2013; Turgeman‐Lupo & Biron, 2017). We suggest that researchers next search for mechanisms to explain this consistently observed commuting spillover relationship, with an emphasis on the relative salience of different work demands in predicting commuting safety.…”

Gossiping about outsiders: How time-related work stress among collectivistic employees hinders job performance

“…Informal conversations about other people's inadequacies or underperformance, even if meant to make the time-pressured employees feel good about themselves (Grosser et al, 2012;Noon & Delbridge, 1993), actually deplete their energy and prevent them from devoting sufficient resources to meeting their performance requirements (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000), consistent with previous studies that point to gossipers' enhanced anxiety levels when they are perceived as less likeable or powerful by other members (Erdogan et al, 2015;Farley, 2011;Michelson & Mouly, 2004). That is, gossip might help time-pressured employees cope with self-depreciating thoughts and forget about their own failures (Beck & Schmidt, 2013;Elfering, Grebner, & de Tribolet-Hardy, 2013), but the associated energy depletion also makes it less likely that they can devote sufficient effort to positive, performance-enhancing activities.…”

Workflow Interruptions and Failed Action Regulation in Surgery Personnel

“…Hence, interruptions might then mediate the effects of cognitive failure on task execution in near-accidents. The accident-prone person model is compared with the hypothesized mediation model [23,24] . A nonsignificant mediation and significantly worse fit of data for the alternative accident-prone person model than in the hypothesized mediation model would increase the plausibility of the latter.…”