No abstract

People are embedded in social interaction that shapes their brains throughout lifetime. Instead of emerging from lower-level cognitive functions, social interaction could be the default mode via which humans communicate with their environment. Should this hypothesis be true, it would have profound implications on how we think about brain functions and how we dissect and simulate them. We suggest that the research on the brain basis of social cognition and interaction should move from passive spectator science to studies including engaged participants and simultaneous recordings from the brains of the interacting persons.

In the absence of external stimuli, human hemodynamic brain activity displays slow intrinsic variations. To find out whether such fluctuations would be altered by persistent pain, we asked 10 patients with unrelenting chronic pain of different etiologies and 10 sex-and agematched control subjects to rest with eyes open during 3-T functional MRI. Independent component analysis was used to identify functionally coupled brain networks. Time courses of an independent component comprising the insular cortices of both hemispheres showed stronger spectral power at 0.12 to 0.25 Hz in patients than in control subjects, with the largest difference at 0.16 Hz. A similar but weaker effect was seen in the anterior cingulate cortex, whereas activity of the precuneus and early visual cortex, used as a control site, did not differ between the groups. In the patient group, seed pointbased correlation analysis revealed altered spatial connectivity between insulae and anterior cingulate cortex. The results imply both temporally and spatially aberrant activity of the affective painprocessing areas in patients suffering from chronic pain. The accentuated 0.12-to 0.25-Hz fluctuations in the patient group might be related to altered activity of the autonomic nervous system. functional MRI | insula | resting state | autonomic nervous system | human A cute pain has an important protective function and is supported by a well-known brain network comprising the insular cortex, anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), primary and secondary somatosensory cortex, and thalamus (1). When pain becomes chronic, its physiological protective function is lost. Chronic pain decreases the quality of life and interferes with the cognitive, affective, and physical functioning. Although one-fifth of the Western population suffers from chronic pain (2), the underlying brain activity is poorly understood.Extensive meta-analyses (1, 3, 4) indicate that the brain areas related to chronic and acute pain differ to some extent, but no single brain-activity pattern is specific to chronic pain. Morphometric analyses suggest gray-matter loss in many chronic pain conditions, indicating that chronic pain may alter brain structure (5), but in a reversible manner (6).Previous studies on the brain basis of chronic pain have concentrated on abnormal activation sites and strengths following external stimulation. Studies of resting-state brain activity by means of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) have shown that the connectivity within the default-mode network (7) is altered in chronic pain, together with reduced task-related deactivation within this network (8, 9). Recently, the spectra of the default-mode network were shown to contain more power at 0.05 to 0.1 Hz in patients suffering from diabetic neuropathic pain than in healthy control subjects (9).In the present study, we focused on the resting-state fluctuations and functional connectivity of the affective pain-processing areas, the insula and ACC, in chronic pain. Specifically, we recorded spontaneous fMRI sig...

Resilience in organizations denotes system agility and robustness, essential to survival and thriving in increasingly challenging contexts. Contemporary scholarship has acknowledged the relationship between employee resilience and organizational resilience. Yet interventions aimed at developing employee resilience tend to use stress and well-being as proxy resilience indicators, focusing primarily on individual rehabilitation or the development of personal resources. We argue that these interventions should also consider the development of organizational resources that ensure both the inherent and adaptive resilience of employees. This article introduces employee resilience as behavioral capability, signaled by adaptive, learning, and network-leveraging behaviors, and it discusses ways in which supportive organizational contexts enable the development and enactment of these behaviors. The article proposes a series of resilience-building initiatives, embedded in everyday practice, and elucidates how leading and organizing for the development of employee resilience contributes to improved well-being and performance.

Britt, Shen, Sinclair, Grossman, and Klieger (2016) offer compelling arguments for the need to consider resilience trajectories and to identify the intrapersonal, interpersonal, and contextual factors accountable for unique trajectories. We welcome the call for more focused research efforts toward uncovering the role of resilience in organizations and concur with Britt et al. that there is a need for a clearer characterization of resilience among employees, the correlates of resilience, and the way that resilience can be facilitated. Our objective here is to build on the main thrust of Britt et al.’s focal article by outlining a novel perspective on employee resilience, which we believe will constitute an important contribution to the organizational resilience literature.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to introduce a new measure of employee resilience. Employee resilience is a key capability enabling employees to manage and adapt to continually changing circumstances. While there is an increasing body of research on how to best promote resilience among employees in organizations, the measurement of the construct has received less research attention. The measure introduced in this paper focuses on employee resilience as a work-related capability that can be developed. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents three survey-based studies describing the development of a new measure, the Employee Resilience Scale and its preliminary validation. Study 1 concerns the scale development and testing, along with a confirmatory analysis of the measurement structure in a different sample. Study 2 investigates the discriminant validity of the scale in relation to a well-known measure of personal resilience, the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale. Study 3 was concerned with work-related outcomes of employee resilience (e.g. job engagement). Findings Support was found for the unidimensionality of the scale in Study 1. Study 2 showed a clear differentiation between the two measures of resilience: employee resilience and personal resilience, supporting the discriminant validity of the measure. Study 3 provided evidence for the criterion-related validity of the scale. Research limitations/implications The three studies presented here provide preliminary support that the Employee Resilience Scale can be used to measure resilience among employees. Originality/value While the concept of employee resilience has gained attention in the literature, a measure of the construct has lacked. The study presents a valid measure of employee resilience which can be used to diagnose and develop a more adaptive workplace.

No abstract

The resilience of employees has been recently identified as essential to organizational adaptability in uncertain and dynamic business environments. Yet little is known about how the resilience of employees can be developed. The present study investigated the effect of a wellbeing intervention on two forms of individual resilience: employees' stress‐coping ability (personal resilience) and resilient workplace behaviors (employee resilience). All participants (n = 209) completed an online wellbeing and resilience survey, and a subset of 145 participants took part in a workplace wellbeing intervention for a period of one month, followed by a second survey. The results indicated that personal and employee resilience are two related, but distinct, constructs. Further, following the wellbeing intervention, personal resilience remained stable, but small increases were noted in levels of employee resilience and aspects of wellbeing. Theoretical and practical implications of this research to employee resilience development are discussed.