Stressors can have negative effects on well‐being, but little is known about how an individual's inability to precisely forecast upcoming stress could be a risk factor for well‐being. Antecedents and outcomes of two stress forecasting variables, anticipated stress level and underestimation errors in stress forecasting (operationalized by the residual change scores obtained by regressing the evening experienced stress on the morning anticipated stress), were investigated. In a daily diary study of 110 undergraduate students over a workweek, poor sleep quality and negative affect reported in the morning predicted a higher anticipated stress of the upcoming day. Poor sleep quality was found to be related to less underestimation errors (i.e., more overestimation). Mispredicting the daily stress level was found to predict greater health complaints and negative affect by the end of the day. Those high on trait resilience were found to make fewer underestimation errors on average. Worse emotional outcomes were associated with underestimation errors during stress forecasting than with overestimation errors. This study demonstrates that examining an individual's experience in forecasting upcoming stressors is an important area for future research in determining points of intervention to promote adaptive management of daily demands.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, teachers in the United States, an already at-risk occupation group, experienced new work-related stressors, safety concerns, and work-life challenges, magnifying on-going retention concerns. Integrating | 689 CHANGES IN TURNOVER INTENTIONS ( James et al., 2011), but there is no consensus around what key leader behaviours are needed during a crisis or the role of different leadership levels (e.g., senior, first-line; Bundy et al., 2017). Moreover, the dynamic nature of employees' responses to on-going crises have not been considered (Bundy et al., 2017;Williams et al., 2017), hindering understanding of how employees' changing responses during crisis eventually link to attrition. Thus, research is sorely needed to examine how leader actions across multiple levels relate to employees' dynamic responses during landscape-scale crises, like that created by the COVID-19 pandemic. Doing so would provide organizations with needed evidence-based recommendations and guide further theory development and refinement in crisis management.We use a latent growth modeling (LGM) approach to assess how teacher experiences (i.e., safety concerns, work-life balance) and turnover intentions change over the course of a semester during COVID-19, as a function of leadership actions at the start of the semester. We rely on COVID-19 guidance (McKinsey & Company, 2020) to identify leader actions at two levels (district decision-making and safety communication; principal 1 authoritarian leadership and warmth) that may set the course for teachers' responses. We examine whether leader actions at each level relate to initial teacher turnover intentions at the start of the 2020-2021 school year through their influence on safety concerns and work-life balance, two primary COVID-19 challenges (Kraft et al., 2021;Lizana & Vega-Fernadez, 2021). We expect that district leadership influences teacher retention through structural mechanisms (i.e., district safety practices), whereas principal leadership exert influence through more interpersonal mechanisms (i.e., family support and work-family balance). Further, we theorize that leader actions not only trigger initial employee responses but also set the stage for on-going crisis response. Effective leader actions early on may begin a resource spiral (Hobfoll, 2011) or an accumulation of positive outcomes over time (Williams et al., 2017), which may be especially influential in the context of a crisis (Hobfoll et al., 2018). Thus, we also examine changes in turnover intentions, over the course of the Fall 2020 semester, as a function of initial leader actions and the semester-long trajectories in safety and work-life balance experiences they incite. In sum, our goals are to explain (a) why teachers intended to turnover at the start of the semester, and (b) what factors related to changes in turnover intentions during the semester. To do this, we surveyed 617 U.S. teachers every 2 weeks from August to December 2020.We contribute to occupational health, crisis management, and ...

Workers who are exposed to severe situations such as death, harassment, and others’ suffering at work are vulnerable to symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and severe distress. This distress may extend to their intimate partners, despite their lack of firsthand experience with the traumatic stressors. Although theory and empirical research suggest that employees’ traumatic distress can transmit to their partners, the magnitude of these effects and when, how, and why intimate partners develop secondary traumatic symptoms and distress are not as clear. Drawing from crossover theory as an organizing framework (Westman, 2001), our meta-analysis of 276 articles indicates that the relationship between employee PTSD/distress and spouse PTSD/distress is as strong as the relationship between employee trauma exposure and employee PTSD/distress (ρ = .26), suggesting that workers’ PTSD/distress is as distressing for partners as the traumatic stressors are for workers encountering them firsthand. Our moderation tests further revealed that the trauma-exposed workers’ vulnerability to traumatic stress symptoms was stronger in military than in nonmilitary settings, whereas the extent to which their symptoms crossover to their intimate partners did not vary across occupations. Mediation tests suggest that traumatic stress crossover is partially explained by the worsened quality of the couple’s relationship (e.g., increased social support burden and undermining), consistent with the crossover via couple interaction explanation in crossover theory. On the other hand, there was mixed support for the mediating role of the partner’s empathy, indicating further research and clarification are needed. Implications for crossover theory and practice are discussed.

Resource‐based theories specify personal resources as a central cause and outcome of work–family conflict wherein low personal resource levels beget further resource losses, in part through increased work–family conflict. Yet, adaptation and trait theories suggest chronic factors drive stability in personal resources and work–family conflict, potentially making resource loss spirals unlikely for most workers. Despite being fundamental tenets of resource‐based theories of work–family conflict, the causal relationships among personal resources and work–family conflict over the meso‐term (i.e., several months) have been unclear in previous empirical research. We test theory by examining causal relationships over the meso‐term using a general cross‐lagged panel model (GCLM), which, unlike the cross‐lagged panel model used in prior research, accounts for chronic factors and tests the persistence of changes. We tested these effects by surveying school administrators (N = 1418) over four consecutive months. Despite finding some small reciprocal relationships, GCLM results provided no evidence for meso‐term loss spirals in which personal resource losses were followed by further losses, independent of or via work–family conflict. These findings challenge resource‐based theories of work–family conflict over the meso‐term and suggest the need to examine chronic factors and adaptation in work–family conflict research to understand meso‐term dynamics.

Summary As inequality in wealth and income continues to grow, it is important to consider the implications of financial disparities for worker motivation and behavior. While workers with socioeconomic disadvantages have a decreased chance of career success and upward social mobility, the potential mechanisms linking financial status to work motivation outcomes are not fully known. Drawing on theory on resource scarcity, we address this issue and propose that financial inadequacy shapes the extent to which workers consider and plan for the future, with consequences for goal‐striving strategies throughout adulthood. Latent change analyses of data from a heterogeneous sample of 4,446 working adults largely supported the hypotheses. Results showed that a high level of financial inadequacy predicted increases in short‐term time horizon and decreases in future‐oriented planning, which then predicted disadvantageous changes in goal‐striving strategies over an 18‐year period. Short‐term time horizon also predicted subsequent increases in financial inadequacy. By highlighting the motivational challenges associated with inadequate finances that accompany low‐wage employment, our study offers evidence for the motivational mechanisms that may reinforce economic inequality and social mobility in the workforce.