Most people would agree with the maxim that "success breeds success". However, this is not the whole story. The current study investigates the additional impact of psychosocial factors (i.e., performance obstacles and facilitators) as well as psychological well-being (i.e., burnout and engagement) on success (i.e., academic performance). More specifically, our purpose is to show that, instead of directly affecting future performance, obstacles and facilitators exert an indirect effect via student well-being. The sample was composed of 527 university students who filled out a questionnaire, and whose previous and future academic performance (GPA) was taken from the university's records. Structural equations modeling showed that the best predictor of future performance was the student's previous performance. As expected, study engagement mediated the relationship between performance obstacles and facilitators on the one hand, and future performance on the other. Contrary to expectations, burnout did not predict future performance, although it was significantly associated with the presence of obstacles and the absence of facilitators. Our results illustrate that, although "success breeds success" (i.e., the best predictor of future performance is past performance) positive psychological states like study engagement are also important in explaining future performance, at least more than negative states like study burnout.

This study investigates the effects of e-groups on well-being and performance, using a collective approach and an objective performance indicator. Furthermore, it includes collective efficacy as a moderator and negative (anxiety) as well as positive (engagement) well-being. A lab experiment with an interval of 3 weeks was performed among 140 students who were randomly distributed across 18 groups using a chat-internet program and 10 groups working face to face. Half the groups performed under time pressure. Results confirm the moderating role of perceived collective efficacy on well-being and task performance. All groups working under time pressure and low in collective efficacy show an increase in collective anxiety. Chat-internet groups under time pressure show an increase in collective engagement but only when they feel high in collective efficacy. Finally, task performance was poorer in chat groups, working under time pressure, and with low levels of collective efficacy than in the other groups.

No abstract

PostprintCita bibliográfica / Cita bibliogràfica (ISO 690): LORENTE, Laura, et al. How personal resources predict work engagement and self-rated performance among construction workers: A social cognitive perspective.

Registro de acceso restringido Este recurso no está disponible en acceso abierto por política de la editorial. No obstante, se puede acceder al texto completo desde la Universitat Jaume I o si el usuario cuenta con suscripción. Registre d'accés restringit Aquest recurs no està disponible en accés obert per política de l'editorial. No obstant això, es pot accedir al text complet des de la Universitat Jaume I o si l'usuari compta amb subscripció. Restricted access item This item isn't open access because of publisher's policy. The full--text version is only available from Jaume I University or if the user has a running suscription to the publisher's contents.

Among job attitudes, overall job satisfaction has received the greatest attention in organizational research and it has frequently been suggested as the key factor influencing employees' performance. Although it reflects individual experiences, job Many people spend a significant amount of time in their workplace and the feelings of work-related satisfaction or dissatisfaction contribute to overall quality of life and psychological well-being (Judge and Watanabe 1993;Wright et al., 1999).Beyond the value of positive feelings for the individual, the benefits for organizations have been widely investigated, stressing the impact of job satisfaction on several organizational outcomes (e.g., Judge and Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012;Spagnoli et al., 2012). Moreover, the link between job satisfaction and job performance has long been of interest to organizational psychologists and several studies have suggested that job satisfaction is a key factor influencing productivity and job performance (Judge et al., 2001; Riketta, 2008).Up to now, job satisfaction has been studied mainly at the individual level, focusing on employees' characteristics like self-efficacy, core self-evaluations, and dispositional affect (Fernandez-Ballesteros et al., 2002; Judge and Kammeyer-Mueller 2012). A few studies have related work resilience and job satisfaction (Larson and Luthans, 2006;Youssef and Luthans, 2007), showing that individuals with higher levels of resilience are more likely to positively adapt and successfully bounce back from negative events in the workplace, and this can enhance their job satisfaction. However, these few studies are mostly correlational and cross-sectional, making difficult to establish causal relationships. Although job satisfaction reflects an evaluation of individual experiences, it is also likely to be affected by the attributes of the context in which the individual operates (Ostroff, 1992(Ostroff, , 1993. Social environment variables, such as relationships with coworkers and supervisors, are closely related to job satisfaction and predict satisfaction levels above and beyond characteristics of the work itself (Judge RUNNING HEAD: Predicting job satisfaction and performance 3 and Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012; Morgeson and Humphrey, 2006). In this regard, Borgogni and colleagues (Alessandri et al., 2014; Borgogni et al., 2011a; Borgogni et al., 2010b) introduced the concept of "Perceptions of Social Context" (PoSC 1 ), defined as the individual's perceptions of the more relevant social constituents internal to the organization (i.e., top management, immediate supervisor, and colleagues). At the aggregated level, PoSC could work as a broad concept reflecting the overall work-unit perception of the social environment.In light of the paucity of studies investigating the interplay of individual and group variables in shaping job satisfaction, it seems imperative to explore its antecedents from a multilevel perspective. To describe the interrelationships among variables measured at different levels (i.e.,...

The aim of this article is twofold: (a) to validate the psychometric properties of the Academic Resilience Scale (AR‐S) in a Spanish university context; and (b) to test a model where different coping strategies are antecedents of AR, and where academic satisfaction and performance are its consequences. The studies were conducted with 185 (study 1) and 780 (study 2) students. In study 1, the construct validity, reliability, and convergent and divergent validity of the AR‐S were analyzed. The hypothesized model (study 2) was tested using structural equation modeling. The results confirmed the good psychometric properties of the AR‐S in the Spanish context, providing evidence of its validity. Furthermore, the distinctive role of different coping strategies in resilience was confirmed, as well as the relationship between resilience and academic satisfaction. No direct relationship between resilience and performance was found, highlighting the full mediation of satisfaction.

Taking the Social Cognitive Theory by Albert Bandura as its starting point, this paper tests the hypothesis that academic self-efficacy influences future academic success through the differential impact of internal and external attribution of past success. Structural Equation Modelling performed with data from a longitudinal sample of 527 university students provides strong evidence supporting the research model. These findings show that past academic success has a positive influence on academic self-efficacy (p < .001) and on future academic success (p < .001). Two processes can then occur:(1) when self-efficacy is related with an internal attribution (p < .001) it has a positive impact on future academic success over time (p < .001); (2) when self-efficacy is related with an external attribution (p < .001) it has a negative impact on future academic success (p < .05). Theoretical and practical implications, as well as its limitations and future research, are discussed.