Crossover of Weekly Work Engagement Among Dual-Working Couples

Tian, Lili; Chen, Huihui; Zhu, Lejie; Tang, Dahua; Yang, Ying; Yang, Huijing

doi:10.1007/s10869-016-9451-z

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence, although our theoretical rationale is not bound to a specific cultural setting, the pattern of results we observed might differ in other cultures. Furthermore, Study 2's sample size was relatively small (i.e., 114 individuals across 57 dyads), only slightly surpassing recommended minimum benchmarks (Du & Wang, 2016;Kenny et al, 2006)-although we note that this is consistent with the sample sizes reported in other current APIM studies in the field of applied psychology (e.g., Peeters et al, 2016;Schlegel et al, 2018;Tian et al, 2017). Thus, we cannot rule out that some of our divergent findings between Studies 1 and 2 may originate from sample size differences, particularly considering the inconsistent support for Hypothesis 2.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitationssupporting

confidence: 84%

A dyadic approach toward the interpersonal consequences of time pressure.

Briker

Hohmann

Walter³

2021

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the "Taverne" license above, please follow below link for the End User

show abstract

Section: Strengths and Limitationssupporting

confidence: 84%

A dyadic approach toward the interpersonal consequences of time pressure.

Briker

Hohmann

Walter³

2021

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: The Social Psychology Of Work Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The crossover effect was particularly strong when husbands adopted the psychological perspective of their wife. Cognitive attunement serves the goal of understanding the other's work-related attitudes and feelings and, therefore, strengthens the impact of the other's work engagement (see also, Tian et al, 2017). Using a spillover-crossover perspective, Shimazu et al (2020) showed that Japanese working parents' work engagement was associated with their children's psychological well-being.…”

Section: Work Engagement Spillovermentioning

confidence: 99%

The social psychology of work engagement: state of the field

Bakker

2022

CDI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeResearch on work engagement is flourishing and shows important links between work engagement and career success. However, a systematic account of the social-psychological origins of engagement is largely lacking. In the paper, the author develops a theoretical model and discusses how employees actively influence and are influenced by employees' leader's, colleagues' and partner's work engagement.Design/methodology/approachThe author integrates literatures on emotional contagion, team work engagement, leadership, proactive work behavior and work-to-family spillover. This results in a model of the social-psychological processes involved in work engagement.FindingsWork engagement is the result of various social-psychological processes. First, work engagement is contagious – colleagues, leaders and the intimate partner can be important causes of engagement. Second, work engagement emerges at the team-level when team members collectively experience high levels of vigor, dedication and absorption. Team members of engaged teams synchronize their activities well and perform better. Third, leaders may influence employee work engagement through fast (unconscious) and slow (conscious) influence processes. Fourth, employees may use social forms of proactive behavior to stay engaged in their work, including job crafting and playful work design. Finally, work engagement may spill over and enrich the family domain. The social-psychological model of work engagement shows how leaders, followers and family members provide, craft and receive (i.e. exchange) resources and facilitate each other's work and family engagement.Practical implicationsOrganizations may increase work engagement by using social-psychological interventions, including training sessions that foster fast and slow leadership, team-boosting behaviors and (team-level) job crafting and playful work design.Originality/valueWhereas most previous studies have focused on job demands and resources as possible causes of work engagement, the present article outlines the state of the field regarding the social-psychological processes involved in engagement.

show abstract

“…A second possibility is that role senders’ work attitudes act as an antecedent to crossover. When the role sender experiences negative work attitudes, he/she may transmit the negative work experience to the role receiver by complaining about the job experiences (Tian et al, 2017). The role receiver may develop empathetic reactions as he or she tries to imagine how they would have felt if they were placed in the role sender’s shoes (Ferguson et al, 2010).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, to understand and validate the work attitudes of the role sender, the role receiver may vicariously experience the work attitudes of the role sender (Ferguson et al, 2010). Through a conscious or an unconscious process, the role receiver may develop the same attitude, resulting in the alignment of work attitudes between the spouses (Tian et al, 2017). Finally, direct crossover may come at an emotional cost to the role receiver because he/she has to expend regulatory resources to be sympathetic with the work attitudes of the role sender (Hobfoll, 1989).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Work–family crossover: A meta-analytic review.

Li¹,

Cropanzano²,

Butler³

et al. 2021

International Journal of Stress Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crossover theory describes the transmission of stress/strains that are experienced by one person to another (Westman, Human Relations, 54, 2001, 717–752). In our article, we review the extant literature and present results from a meta-analysis—the first ever of this literature—to shed light on the magnitude of the crossover effect, the predictors and outcomes of crossover, and the psychological process underlying the crossover effect. Our meta-analysis offered evidence of crossover of the role sender’s work stressors, work attitudes, and work-to-family conflict (WFC) to the role receiver’s psychological distress, family satisfaction, and work attitudes. We also found some support for the hypothesis that the role sender’s positive social behavior mediates these effects.

show abstract

Crossover of Weekly Work Engagement Among Dual-Working Couples

Cited by 5 publications

References 57 publications

A dyadic approach toward the interpersonal consequences of time pressure.

A dyadic approach toward the interpersonal consequences of time pressure.

The social psychology of work engagement: state of the field

Work–family crossover: A meta-analytic review.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About