Matching Items (3)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

156464-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
There are some factors that have been used to explain why the presence of a calling (i.e., “an approach to work that reflects the belief that one's career is a central part of a broader sense of purpose and meaning in life and is used to help others or advance

There are some factors that have been used to explain why the presence of a calling (i.e., “an approach to work that reflects the belief that one's career is a central part of a broader sense of purpose and meaning in life and is used to help others or advance the greater good in some fashion” (Duffy & Dik, 2013, p. 429) reduces work stress and its potential negative outcomes, such as absenteeism, job performance and productivity, work-related accidents and overall employee health. The effect of problem-focused coping, however, remains largely untested as a potential mediator in this relation. The present study was conducted to quantitatively test whether problem-focused coping would mediate the relation between having a calling to work and perceived work stress in zookeepers. Participants were recruited through an online survey. They responded to questionnaires regarding calling, problem-focused coping, and work stress. Using hierarchical regression analyses, it was found that problem-focused coping partially mediated the relation between presence of a calling and perceived work stress. Specifically, having the presence of a calling to work predicted greater problem-focused style of coping, which, in turn, led to lower perceived work stress. Future directions for research were discussed.
ContributorsKemsley, Jourdan (Author) / Miller, Paul (Thesis advisor) / Hall, Deborah (Committee member) / Duran, Nicholas (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
141315-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

The majority of trust research has focused on the benefits trust can have for individual actors, institutions, and organizations. This “optimistic bias” is particularly evident in work focused on institutional trust, where concepts such as procedural justice, shared values, and moral responsibility have gained prominence. But trust in institutions may

The majority of trust research has focused on the benefits trust can have for individual actors, institutions, and organizations. This “optimistic bias” is particularly evident in work focused on institutional trust, where concepts such as procedural justice, shared values, and moral responsibility have gained prominence. But trust in institutions may not be exclusively good. We reveal implications for the “dark side” of institutional trust by reviewing relevant theories and empirical research that can contribute to a more holistic understanding. We frame our discussion by suggesting there may be a “Goldilocks principle” of institutional trust, where trust that is too low (typically the focus) or too high (not usually considered by trust researchers) may be problematic. The chapter focuses on the issue of too-high trust and processes through which such too-high trust might emerge. Specifically, excessive trust might result from external, internal, and intersecting external-internal processes. External processes refer to the actions institutions take that affect public trust, while internal processes refer to intrapersonal factors affecting a trustor’s level of trust. We describe how the beneficial psychological and behavioral outcomes of trust can be mitigated or circumvented through these processes and highlight the implications of a “darkest” side of trust when they intersect. We draw upon research on organizations and legal, governmental, and political systems to demonstrate the dark side of trust in different contexts. The conclusion outlines directions for future research and encourages researchers to consider the ethical nuances of studying how to increase institutional trust.

ContributorsNeal, Tess M.S. (Author) / Shockley, Ellie (Author) / Schilke, Oliver (Author)
Created2016
162006-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly impacted the structure of work foremployees worldwide, as many began working remotely in response to national and local social distancing efforts. These changes occurring amid the transition to remote working conditions led to the question of how daily stress and daily uplifts occur in this new work context.

The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly impacted the structure of work foremployees worldwide, as many began working remotely in response to national and local social distancing efforts. These changes occurring amid the transition to remote working conditions led to the question of how daily stress and daily uplifts occur in this new work context. For the present thesis study, I explored how internal (i.e., optimism) and external (i.e., team flow) resources function to moderate the effects of daily hassles and uplifts on employee well-being (i.e., burnout and professional efficacy) during the COVID-19 pandemic. In a sample of 417 adults at baseline, and 266 at the follow-up, I investigated how specific resources function to protect employees experiencing occupational burnout. Additionally, I explored gender differences in these relationships. Study results demonstrated that both daily uplifts and hassles predicted burnout and professional efficacy at earlier stages of the pandemic, while at a later stage in the pandemic, the relationships between daily uplifts and burnout and daily hassles and burnout persisted, but only daily hassles were associated with professional efficacy. For males at baseline, higher scores in optimism strengthened the negative relationship between daily uplifts and burnout. Surprisingly, males with relatively low team flow in work or school settings seemed to fare better professionally with increased daily hassles. This finding indicates that males with less collaboration at work thrive as they experience increased daily stress. While these findings are specific to the COVID-19 context, they may be beneficial for companies and supervisors seeking to improve employee engagement.
ContributorsO'Brien, Mary (Author) / Mickelson, Kristin D (Thesis advisor) / Hall, Deborah (Committee member) / Luciano, Margaret (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021