Effects of Role Stressors Appraised as Challenges and Hindrances on Work Outcomes

dc.contributor.advisorGlazer, Sharon
dc.contributor.advisorKożusznik, Małgorzata
dc.contributor.authorWetzelberger, Samantha K.
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Baltimore. Yale Gordon College of Arts and Sciencesen
dc.contributor.programMaster of Science in Applied Psychologyen
dc.date.accessioned2018-01-31T20:15:39Z
dc.date.available2018-01-31T20:15:39Z
dc.date.issued2017-12
dc.descriptionM.S. -- University of Baltimore, 2017
dc.descriptionThesis submitted to the Yale Gordon College of Arts and Sciences of the University of Baltimore in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Applied Psychology.
dc.description.abstractThis study examines the moderating effects of stressor appraisal as a challenge, hindrance, both, or neither among 237 full-time employees who completed surveys via MTurk. Utilizing the Transactional Model of stress, it was predicted that correlations between each of role ambiguity, role conflict, and role overload would negatively relate with general well-being, affective commitment, and job satisfaction, and positively relate with tedium, anxiety, and turnover intentions. Second, it was expected that when appraising a role stressor as a high challenge (vs. a high hindrance) the deleterious effects of stressors on outcomes would be weaker. The first prediction is supported; however, the second set of predictions are only partially supported. The appraisal of a stressor as a hindrance indicates stronger deleterious effects on psychological strains, specifically anxiety and tedium. Whereas, when stressors, specifically role conflict, are appraised as a challenge, there appears to be a modest buffering effect on general well-being and job satisfaction. Third, this study examined a three-way interaction between each of the role stressors, and the appraisal of a stressor as a (high or low) challenge and a (high or low) hindrance. Results indicate that role conflict appraised as a low hindrance and a high challenge mitigates the deleterious relationship between role conflict and tedium. In fact, when role conflict is appraised as a high hindrance and a low challenge, the positive relationship between role conflict and tedium intensifies. Furthermore, when role conflict is appraised as a high hindrance and as a high challenge, there is little to no protection from the deleterious effects of role conflict on tedium. These findings further highlight the importance of self-appraisal and indicate that challenge stressors do not always lead to positive outcomes, but perceiving stressors as challenges may help to mitigate negative outcomes.en
dc.format.extent132 leavesen
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.genrethesesen
dc.identifierdoi:10.13016/M2FX74066
dc.identifier.otherUB_2017_Wetzelberger_S
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11603/7735
dc.language.isoenen
dc.rightsThis item may be protected under Title 17 of the U.S. Copyright Law. It is made available by the University of Baltimore for non-commercial research and educational purposes.
dc.subjectRole Stressorsen
dc.subjectChallenge stressorsen
dc.subjectHindrance stressorsen
dc.subjectTediumen
dc.subjectGeneral Well-beingen
dc.subjectJob Satisfactionen
dc.subjectAnxietyen
dc.subjectTurnover Intentionsen
dc.subjectAffective Commitmenten
dc.subjectPsychological Strainen
dc.subjectOrganizational Outcomesen
dc.titleEffects of Role Stressors Appraised as Challenges and Hindrances on Work Outcomesen
dc.typeTexten

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Wetzelberger_Thesis_10January2018_F.PDF
Size:
1.45 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Thesis Text

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: