Effort-reward imbalance and work-home interference: a two-wave study among European male nurses

Gorgievski, Marjan J.; Heijden, Beatrice van der; Bakker, Arnold B.

doi:10.1080/02678373.2018.1503358

Cited by 27 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In accordance with the findings of previous studies conducted in different occupational settings (e.g. Gorgievski et al 2018;Niedhammer et al 2003;Van Vegchel et al 2005), perceptions of high effort and low rewards at work were found to threaten health status. Academics who indicated that they put more effort into their work and who were more overcommitted to the job role tended to report poorer mental and physical health.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Some studies have supported the main effects of efforts and rewards on health-related outcomes (e.g. Gorgievski, Van der Heijden, & Bakker, 2018;Preckel, Meinel, Kudielka, Haug, & Fischer, 2007;Van Vegchel, De Jonge, & Bosma & Schaufeli, 2005). The negative effects of an effort-reward imbalance are, however, central to the model and high effort/low reward conditions (most frequently represented by a ratio of efforts to rewards) have been found to increase the risk of health problems (Hasselhorn, Tackenberg, & Peter, 2013;Siegrist, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effort-reward imbalance in academic employees: Examining different reward systems.

Kinman

2019

International Journal of Stress Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study draws upon the effort-reward imbalance (ERI) model of job stress to predict mental and physical health in academic employees working in UK universities. It examines the main and interactive effects of extrinsic efforts over time and the three reward systems of the ERI model independently (i.e. promotion, esteem and security rewards). The main and interactive effects of intrinsic effort (known as overcommitment) in predicting health status are also examined. A sample of 458 academic employees completed ERI scales at baseline and the health measures 14 months later. The results showed that higher extrinsic effort, lower esteem and security rewards and an imbalance between efforts and esteem rewards assessed at Time 1 predicted mental health status on follow-up. Physical health symptoms were predicted by higher extrinsic effort and lower security rewards. Overcommitment was an independent risk factor for both mental and physical health. No further contribution was made to the variance in either outcome by the other effort-reward ratios independently or by their interactions with overcommitment. Interventions are suggested that have potential to reduce extrinsic and intrinsic efforts and increase rewards in the university sector.Abstract is confusion and contains too many details (e.g. I recommend not to mention the reward subdimensions). Please focus more and write more condensed and mention 'hypotheses derived from the ERI model were tested among UK academics in a longitudinal way' Results can be mentioned by referring to particular subdimensions, according to me. Some explanation of the reward dimensions is required for the reader to make sense of the approach taken -i.e. to examine the effects of each of the three reward systems. The length of the explanation has, however, been reduced Given the results, I would recommend to delete the full last sentence, it's an overinterpretation according to me. You can mention, e.g. 'implications of the results and shortcomings of the study are discussed.' This information is needed in view of the theme of the special edition: i.e. to provide insight into work-related wellbeing in academic employees and how this might be improved. This was emphasised in the call for papers page 3 replace the current heading Background into Effort-reward imbalance in academic employees: examining different reward systems AbstractThis study draws on the effort-reward imbalance (ERI) model of job stress to predict mental and physical health in academic employees working in UK universities. It examines the main and interactive effects of extrinsic efforts over time as well as the independent contributions of the three reward systems of the model (i.e. promotion, esteem and security rewards). The main and interactive effects of intrinsic effort (known as overcommitment) in predicting health status are also examined. A sample of 458 academic employees completed ERI scales at baseline and the health measures 14 months later. Higher extrinsic effort, lower esteem and security rewards and a...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Effort-reward imbalance in academic employees: Examining different reward systems.

Kinman

2019

International Journal of Stress Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is also the case of the ERI scale, which is based on the postulate that the imbalance (interaction) between the rewards obtained in exchange of job efforts is critical to explain outcomes, more than their isolated main effects. However, accounting for these interaction effects generally did not increase the explained variance of outcomes in empirical studies (e.g., Brough and Biggs, 2015;Gorgievski et al, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Scales Used to Measure Job Stressors in Intensive Care Units: Are They Relevant and Reliable? A Systematic Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Many studies have been conducted in intensive care units (ICUs) to identify the stress factors involved in the health of professionals and the quality and safety of care. The objectives are to identify the psychometric scales used in these studies to measure stressors and to assess their relevance and validity/reliability. Methods: All peer-reviewed full-text articles published in English between 1997 and 2016 and focusing on an empirical quantitative study of job stressors were identified through searches on seven databases and editorial portals. Results: From the 102 studies analyzed, we identified 59 different scales: 17 "all settings scales" (16 validated scales), 20 "healthcare settings scales" (13 validated scales), and 22 "ICU settings scales" (two validated scales). All these scales used measured stressors from at least one of the following eight broad categories: High job demands, Problematic relationships with other professionals, Lack of control over work situations and career, Lack of organizational resources, Problematic situations with users and relatives, Dealing with ethical-and moral-related situations, Risk management issues, and Disadvantages in comparison to other occupational situations. The "all settings scales" and "healthcare settings scales," the most often validated, did not measure, or only slightly measured, the stressors most specific to ICUs. Where these were taken into account, the authors were forced to develop their own tools or modify existing scales without testing the validity of the tool used. Conclusions: This review highlights the lack of a tool that meets both the criteria of validity and relevance with regard to the specificity of work in ICUs. Future research must focus on developing reliable/valid tools covering all types of relevant stressors to ensure the quality of the studies carried out in this field.

show abstract

“…Finally, the study aimed to analyze in detail the role of gender, exploring our research questions by focusing on male and female nurses, rather than by treating gender as a potential confounder. In fact, considering research on WFC among the nursing population, a sizable portion of studies is exclusively targeted on female nurses, while the male nurse population is still overall under-researched (Gorgievski, Van der Heijden, & Bakker, 2018), so reducing the possibility to understand the generalizability of research results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Work–family conflict and psychophysical health conditions of nurses: Gender differences and moderating variables

Zurlo

Vallone

Smith

2020

Japan Journal Nursing Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: This study aims to investigate the associations of perceived work-family conflict with nurses' psychophysical health conditions, exploring gender differences and analyzing the potential moderating effects of perceived job control (skill discretion and decision authority), social support, and job satisfaction. Methods: The study was carried out in five hospitals of the Italian Public Health Service. Participants were 450 nurses (206 men, 244 women). Selfadministered questionnaires were used to collect data. Descriptive statistics and hierarchical regression analyses were conducted.Results: Female nurses perceived significantly higher levels of work-family conflict, anxiety, depression and somatization. Significant gender differences emerged in the associations between work-family conflict and nurses' psychological health conditions and in moderating variables. Work-family conflict was significantly associated with anxiety and depression in male nurses and with somatization in both genders. The associations of work-family conflict with nurses' psychophysical health conditions were moderated by decision authority and job satisfaction, in male nurses, and by social support, in female nurses.Conclusions: Findings suggest including gender-specific moderating variables for defining tailored policies and interventions within healthcare organizations to reduce perceived work-family conflict and to promote nurses' wellbeing.

show abstract

Effort-reward imbalance and work-home interference: a two-wave study among European male nurses

Cited by 27 publications

References 59 publications

Effort-reward imbalance in academic employees: Examining different reward systems.

Effort-reward imbalance in academic employees: Examining different reward systems.

Scales Used to Measure Job Stressors in Intensive Care Units: Are They Relevant and Reliable? A Systematic Review

Work–family conflict and psychophysical health conditions of nurses: Gender differences and moderating variables

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About