Based on the job demands-resources (JD-R) model, this study examines the different ways that the personal resource of mindfulness reduces stress. Structural equation modeling based on data from 415 Australian nurses shows that mindfulness relates directly and negatively to work stress and perceptions of emotional demands as well as buffering the relation of emotional demands on psychological stress. This study contributes to the literature by employing empirical analysis to the task of unravelling how personal resources function within the JD-R model. It also introduces mindfulness as a personal resource in the JD-R model.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to demystify the role of the personal resource of psychological capital (PsyCap) in the job demands-resources model. The theory suggests that personal resources directly influence perceptions of job demands, job resources, and outcomes. Alternatively, personal resources may moderate the impact of job demands and job resources on outcomes. Design/methodology/approach A survey of 401 nurses working in the Australian healthcare sector explores the relations among PsyCap, job demands and resources, and psychological well-being and work engagement. Findings The results suggest that PsyCap directly influences perceptions of job demands and resources and that it directly influences the outcomes of well-being and engagement. Furthermore, job demands and job resources mediate the relation of PsyCap with well-being and engagement, respectively. Research limitations/implications The moderation effect of PsyCap was not supported, which suggests that PsyCap relates to perceptions as opposed to being a coping mechanism. This finding therefore narrows the scope of personal resources in this important model. Originality/value The importance of this study lies in its exploration of various ways that personal resources can influence this dominant model and in analyzing the global construct of PsyCap as opposed to some of its constituent parts.

For two-choice tasks in which stimulus and response locations vary along horizontal and vertical dimensions, the spatial compatibility effect is often stronger on the horizontal than vertical dimension. Umiltà and Nicoletti [(1990) Spatial stimulus-response compatibility (pp. 89-116). Amsterdam: North-Holland] attributed this right-left prevalence effect to an inability to code vertical location when horizontal codes are present simultaneously. Hommel [(1996) Perception & Psychophysics, 43, 102-110] suggested instead that it reflects a voluntary strategy. This study reports four experiments that examine this issue. Experiment 1 was a conceptual replication of Hommel's Experiment 1, with responses made on a numeric key-pad and subjects instructed in terms of the vertical or horizontal dimension. The results replicated Hommel's findings that showed a right-left advantage with horizontal instructions; however, with vertical instructions, we found a benefit of vertical compatibility alone that he did not. This benefit for vertical compatibility alone was eliminated in Experiment 2 using a varied practice schedule similar to that used by Hommel. Experiment 3 showed right-left prevalence and a benefit of vertical compatibility alone, even with varied practice and vertical instructions, when subjects responded on perpendicularly arranged hand-grips. These benefits were eliminated in Experiment 4 using Hommel's method of urging subjects to respond only in terms of the instructed dimension. With bimanual responses, right-left prevalence is a robust phenomenon that is evident when comparing across vertical and horizontal instructions and, when the right-left distinction is relatively salient, within the vertical instructions condition alone.

No abstract

Factors that make response selection more difficult, most notably incompatibility between displays and controls, degrade performance. The cost of incompatibility on performance is often much greater for older than for younger adults. To design products that accommodate decreased response selection capabilities of older adults, designers need to understand the specific ways in which response selection processes change with age. The purpose of the present paper is to review research on age-related changes in stimulus-response compatibility and response precuing effects, the two effects that are most directly linked to basic response selection processes. Several specific aspects of response selection that are particularly harmful for older adults' performance are identified. Potential applications of this research include initial guidelines for minimizing the effects of those aspects when designing for older adults.

This study shows that there is a causal relationship between change, non-nursing stressors and job satisfaction. Senior management should implement strategies aimed at reducing nursing and non-nursing stress during change in order to enhance the job satisfaction of nurses.

The authors examined clockwise and counterclockwise wheel-rotation responses to high- or low-pitched tones presented in participants' (N = 96, Experiment 1; N = 48, Experiment 2; N = 48, Experiment 3) left and right ears. In Experiment 1, a Simon effect (fastest responding when tone location and direction of wheel turn corresponded) was obtained when participants' hands were at the top or middle of the wheel but not at the bottom. With the bottom hand placement, a Simon effect was induced by instructions emphasizing hand movements but not by instructions emphasizing wheel movements (Experiment 2), and by a visual cursor controlled by the wheel but not one triggered by the response (Experiment 3). The results of the experiments showed that the nature of the task and the instructed action goal influence the direction of the Simon effect.

of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.