خوداثربخشی و تاثیر کار کارگران جوان: مسیرهایی برای سلامت و عملکرد

This longitudinal study of 195 young workers responds to calls for the study of healthy work at discrete life stages. Based on social cognitive and affective events theories and using structural equation modeling, results indicated that both perceived job self-efficacy and job-related affect fully mediate the relationship between interpersonal work conflict at time 1 and the outcomes of job performance and health at time 2. Furthermore, job-related affect mediates the relationship between intrinsic job characteristics at time 1 and job performance and health at time 2. Finally, young workers’ job performance at time 2 was directly predicted by perceptions of intrinsic work quality at time 1. Practical implications of these findings and suggestions for future research are also discussed.

About one-third of U.S. post-secondary institutions now have co-op programs (Sovilla, 1998). Co-op education is believed to: enhance career identity and planning, improve employment opportunities and short-term career progress, increase future salaries, create a sense of identity, and improve academic achievement (Howard and England-Kennedy, 2001 and Waryszak, 1999). Public support for co-op work is increasing (e.g., some areas have mandated it for all interested high school students; Provincial Partnership Council, 2002). However, most research to date compares co-op and non-co-op students, and does not compare differences in outcomes due to the quality of co-op work experiences. Compared to other young workers, co-op workers may be more psychologically invested in their work as they “try on” potential careers. Consequently, negative experiences at this point may be particularly detrimental and jeopardize future opportunities. The present study explored common psychological pathways between intrinsic job characteristics and interpersonal conflict on one hand, and job performance and health on the other. In contrast to much of the atheoretical literature on young and non-standard workers, we build on theoretical models of job self-efficacy (Bandura, 1986 and Bandura, 1997) and job-related affect (Brief and Weiss, 2002 and Weiss and Cropanzano, 1996) as psychosocial mediators of these relationships. 1.1. Predictors of health and performance: Intrinsic job characteristics and interpersonal conflict as indicators of job quality Job quality is critical to successful job performance, psychological and physical health among adult workers ( Tetrick & Quick, 2003). If certain features are present in a job, employees are motivated to perform well because individual needs for accomplishment, learning, and personal development are met ( Hackman & Oldham, 1980). Among workers in their mid-twenties, intrinsic job characteristics have been related to both job satisfaction and commitment ( Saks, 1995) as well as outcomes up to 10 months later (e.g., intentions to quit; Ashforth, Saks, & Lee, 1998). Schwartz and Stone (1993) identified another important predictor of job outcomes finding that 75% of all work-related events perceived as harmful were related to negative social interactions. However, the study of workplace interpersonal conflict has been neglected ( de Jonge, Reuvers, Houtman, & Kompier, 2000). Interestingly, the original job characteristics theory discussed above suggested that interactions with coworkers and supervisors are an important influence on employee outcomes ( Oldham, 1996). Among adult workers, interpersonal conflict is positively correlated with anxiety, depression, and physical health symptoms, and negatively correlated with supervisor ratings of job performance ( Spector & Jex, 1998). Weitzman (2001) argued that young workers are at particular risk for interpersonal conflict, and researchers have found that college educated youth often feel inept at handling work-related interpersonal conflicts ( Volkema & Bergmann, 1995). Interpersonal conflict as an indicator of job quality is particularly relevant here, because as Garavan and Murphy (2001) have noted, co-op education involves a socialization process; including job characteristics, feedback, and supervisory and peer relationships. 1.2. Job self-efficacy as a cognitive mediator between work quality and both health and performance Job self-efficacy is a cognitive self-appraisal of the ability to perform well in one’s job (Bozeman, Perrewe, Hochwarter, & Brymer, 2001). Bandura’s (1997) social cognitive theory suggests that intrinsically motivating work (e.g., high levels of skill variety, task significance, task identity, autonomy, and task feedback) fosters enactive mastery experiences, an important source of job self-efficacy. Parker (1998) found that role breadth self-efficacy (i.e., perceiving one can carry out a broader work role) is enhanced by job enrichment (i.e., autonomy), and concluded that work redesign promotes self-efficacy, which in turn enhances performance among adults. Call and Mortimer (2001) suggest that early work experiences (i.e., intrinsic job quality) may be an important factor in the development of young workers’ perceptions of job self-efficacy. Gist and Mitchell (1992) suggest that oral feedback and verbal persuasion about abilities may influence job self-efficacy. Bandura (2000) argues that supportive relationships can enhance self-efficacy through modeling attitudes and strategies for managing problems, providing positive incentives, and resources for effective coping. Thus, perhaps the reverse may also be true (i.e., interpersonal conflict might undermine job self-efficacy). Lee and Ashforth (1996) argue that the absence of social support is the loss of a valued resource for dealing with workplace demands. In their meta-analysis of the correlates of job burnout among human service providers, a lack of social support (e.g., supervisor and coworker) was associated with emotional exhaustion in adults. Notably, Holman and Wall (2002) found no link between job quality and self-efficacy, and attributed this to measuring general self-efficacy versus job self-efficacy (which we measure). Job self-efficacy should not be confused with general self-efficacy (i.e., stable core self-evaluations; Judge, Bono, Erez, Locke, & Thoresen, 2002). Specific self-efficacy measures are more effective in predicting what people will do in specific circumstances than trait conceptions of self-efficacy (cf. self-esteem; Bandura, 1997), and are linked to career development (e.g., Hackett, 1997). Self-efficacy beliefs in turn play a major role in psychological and physical health outcomes among adult workers. For example, low self-efficacy is related to elevated levels of depression and anxiety (i.e., job self-efficacy, Jex & Dudanowski, 1992; achievement self-efficacy, Maddux & Meier, 1995; and coping self-efficacy, Williams, 1995), and high self-efficacy predicts lower blood pressure rates ( Schaubroeck & Merritt, 1997). Smith and Betz (2000) found higher social self-efficacy related to lower depression and higher academic performance in undergraduate students, and higher career decision self-efficacy is related to lower anxiety ( Robbins, 1985). In terms of performance outcomes, Clausen (1991) argued that adolescent (high school) competence (viz., self-efficacy) had consequences for future educational attainment, career stability, and marital stability, even 35–45 years later. Saks and Ashforth (1997) suggest that “initial experiences can trigger a ‘career success cycle,’ wherein positive socialization practices impart the necessary confidence, knowledge, and credibility for the newcomer to perform effectively” (p. 262). Consequently, we predict the following: Hypothesis 1a. Intrinsic job characteristics at the beginning of a work term relate positively, and interpersonal conflict at work relates negatively, to perceived job self-efficacy. Hypothesis 1b. Perceived job self-efficacy in turn relates positively to psychological and physical health and job performance at the end of young workers’ work terms. 1.3. Job-related affect as an emotional mediator between work quality and both health and performance After decades of neglecting the study of emotion (Muchinsky, 2000), there is growing consensus (e.g., Brief and Weiss, 2002 and Spector, 1998) that affect should be examined as a mediator between the work environment and employee outcomes. Experiencing a job as meaningful, feeling responsible for outcomes, and receiving feedback from job performance are theorized to lead to positive affect at work (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). Intrinsic job characteristics seem to produce an “affective kick” by engaging in the job itself ( Hackman and Oldham, 1980 and Saavedra and Kwun, 2000). In terms of young workers, Grandey, Tam, and Brauburger (2002) reported that negative emotions at work predicted lower job satisfaction and higher turnover intentions. Van Katwyk, Fox, Spector, and Kelloway (2000) found interpersonal conflict with coworkers to be negatively related to job-related affect, and Potter, Smith, Strobel, and Zautra (2002) found that workplace and non-workplace interpersonal stressors independently predicted measures of affect. With respect to outcomes, affective responses are considered the principle indicator of mental health ( Warr, 1998). In addition, the role of affect as a cause (or mediator) of physical illness is becoming increasingly clear through a growing body of epidemiological evidence ( Leventhal & Patrick-Miller, 2000). Affect directly impacts health through, for example, physiological responses that elevate blood pressure and heart rate, and increase vulnerability to cardiovascular disease, myocardial infarction, and cancer. The indirect impact of affect on health is also seen through changes in behavior, particularly self-medicative, self-stimulative, and risk-taking behaviors such as excessive alcohol consumption or cigarette smoking. Brief and Weiss (2002) suggest several links between affect and work performance among adults, including withdrawal behaviors (e.g., absenteeism, turnover intentions), creativity in problem solving, quality of decision making, prosocial helping behavior, and general job performance. Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) suggest that certain emotional responses are inconsistent with necessary job performance. For example, feeling sad may be incompatible with providing customer service. Heightened emotional arousal and attention consume emotional energy and leave individuals with “fewer resources” for job performance ( Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996, p. 41). To the extent that job quality produces negative job-related affect we predict it will interfere with performance: Hypothesis 2a. Intrinsic job characteristics and interpersonal conflict at work early in a work term relate positively and negatively respectively to job-related affect. Hypothesis 2b. In turn, job-related affect relates positively to psychological and physical health and job performance at the end of the work term. 2.4. Relationship between mediators There has been considerable debate about whether cognition and emotion can be treated as separate entities, whether one precedes the other, or whether they occur simultaneously (Schorr, 2001). Some theorists suggest that cognition mediates the influence of the environment on emotion (e.g., Clore & Ortony, 2000), focussing on ‘what a person must think to feel a given emotion’ (Lazarus, 1999, p. 90). Bandura (1997) maintains that efficacy beliefs “create attentional biases” (p. 137), and perceived efficacy to exercise control over one’s circumstances may be central in emotional arousal. Maddux (2002) suggests that strong self-efficacy beliefs produce positive emotional states whereas beliefs of inefficacy produce distressing emotional states. In occupational contexts, Gist and Mitchell (1992) argue that self-efficacy “influences individual choices, goals, emotional reactions, effort, coping, and persistence” (p. 186). Weiss and Cropanzano note that the “two stage appraisal process advocated by cognitively oriented emotion researchers” (1996, p. 31) is consistent with their understanding of affective experiences at work. As such, we predict: Hypothesis 3. Perceived job self-efficacy relates positively to job-related affect.