This article reports a meta-analytic test of a two-dimensional work stressor framework with respect to stressors' relationships with strains, motivation, and performance. Hindrance stressors had a negative direct effect on performance, as well as negative indirect effects on performance through strains and motivation. Challenge stressors had a positive direct effect on performance, as well as offsetting indirect effects on performance through strains (negative) and motivation (positive). Results suggest research and practice could benefit by distinguishing among challenge and hindrance stressors. A TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODEL OF STRESSORS AND PERFORMANCE One explanation for inconsistent findings on stress-performance relationships is that there is "good" stress as well as "bad" stress, and it is this good stress that is associated with high perfor-An earlier version of this article was presented at the

In this article, a 2-dimensional work stressor framework is used to explain inconsistencies in past research with respect to stressor relationships with retention-related criteria. Results of meta-analyses of 183 independent samples indicated that whereas hindrance stressors had dysfunctional relationships with these criteria (negative relationships with job satisfaction and organizational commitment and positive relationships with turnover intentions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior), relationships with challenge stressors were generally the opposite (positive relationships with job satisfaction and organizational commitment and negative relationships with turnover intentions and turnover). Results also suggested that the differential relationships between challenge stressors and hindrance stressors and the more distal criteria (withdrawal behavior and turnover) were due, in part, to the mediating effects of job attitudes.

In a study of 696 learners, the authors found that stress associated with challenges in the learning environment had a positive relationship with learning performance and that stress associated with hindrances in the learning environment had a negative relationship with learning performance. They also found evidence suggesting that these stress-learning performance relationships were partially mediated by exhaustion and motivation to lean. Both forms of stress were positively related to exhaustion, and exhaustion was negatively related to learning performance. Hindrance stress was negatively related to motivation to learn, challenge stress was positively related to motivation to learn, and motivation to learn was positively related to learning performance. Implications with respect to theory and practice are discussed.

We develop and test a theoretical model that explores how individuals appraise different types of stressful job demands and how these cognitive appraisals impact job performance. The model also explores how charismatic leaders influence such appraisal and reaction processes, and by virtue of these effects, how leaders can influence the impact of stressful demands on their followers' job performance. In Study 1 (n = 74 U.S. Marines), our model was largely supported in hierarchical linear modeling analyses. Marines whose leaders were judged by superiors to exhibit charismatic leader behaviors appraised challenge stressors as being more challenging, and were more likely to respond to this appraisal with higher performance. Although charismatic leader behaviors did not influence how hindrance stressors were appraised, they negated the strong negative effect of hindrance appraisals on job performance. In Study 2 (n = 270 U.S. Marines) charismatic leader behaviors were measured through the eyes of the focal Marines, and the interactions found in Study 1 were replicated. Results from multilevel structural equation modeling analyses also indicate that charismatic leader behaviors moderate both the mediating role of challenge appraisals in transmitting the effect of challenge stressors to job performance, and the mediating role of hindrance appraisals in transmitting the effect of hindrance stressors to job performance. Implications of our results to theory and practice are discussed. ABSTRACTWe develop and test a theoretical model that explores how individuals appraise different types of stressful job demands and how these cognitive appraisals impact job performance. The model also explores how charismatic leaders influence such appraisal and reaction processes, and by virtue of these effects, how leaders can influence the impact of stressful demands on their followers' job performance. In Study 1 (n = 74 U.S. Marines), our model was largely supported in hierarchical linear modeling analyses. Marines whose leaders were judged by superiors to exhibit charismatic leader behaviors appraised challenge stressors as being more challenging, and were more likely to respond to this appraisal with higher performance. Although charismatic leader behaviors did not influence how hindrance stressors were appraised, they negated the strong negative effect of hindrance appraisals on job performance. In Study 2 (n = 270 U.S. Marines) charismatic leader behaviors were measured through the eyes of the focal Marines, and the interactions found in Study 1 were replicated. Results from multilevel structural equation modeling analyses also indicate that charismatic leader behaviors moderate both the mediating role of challenge appraisals in transmitting the effect of challenge stressors to job performance, and the mediating role of hindrance appraisals in transmitting the effect of hindrance stressors to job performance. Implications of our results to theory and practice are discussed.

No abstract