Search for: All records

In this study we examine whether and why daily work stressors are associated with sleep quality and sleep quantity. We draw on the effort-recovery model to test daily relationships between challenge and hindrance work stressors and sleep quality and quantity through physical and psychological fatigue, and vigor. We analyze daily diary data from 98 working sole mothers collected over seven days. The within-person daily hypotheses linking challenge and hindrance stressors to sleep via energetic mediators in our model were not supported. Exploratory analysis revealed several of our hypotheses were supported at the between-person level. Challenge and hindrance stressors were differentially related to psychological fatigue and physical fatigue such that hindrance stressors were positively associated, and challenge stressors were negatively associated. Challenge and hindrance stressors were differentially related to vigor such that hindrance stressors were negatively associated, and challenge stressors were positively associated. Across individuals, challenge and hindrance stressors were indirectly related to sleep quantity through these energetic mediators. This study answers calls for more investigations into mechanisms linking work stressors and sleep, and emphasizes the importance of examining phenomena at multiple levels of analysis. Theoretical and practical implications for the challenge-hindrance framework and effort-recovery model, including the appropriate timeframe for study, are discussed. 

Work recovery reflects the replenishment of personal resources depleted by working, which has implications for employee health and wellness. However, work scheduling factors have received very limited attention in the recovery literature, despite that recovery is a dynamic process widely recognized to be influenced by contextual factors that define and influence the work role. After first conducting a narrative review of whether and how work scheduling factors are accounted for in existing theories of work recovery, we conduct a systematic review of existing work recovery research to identify any past empirical consideration of work scheduling factors in the recovery research base. We then harness the results of this systematic review to develop a taxonomy of work scheduling and related contextual factors that may be relevant to the process of recovery from work. We discuss the theoretical, practical, and methodological implications that emerged from our narrative and systematic reviews, providing guidance for how this newly developed taxonomy can be applied to understanding the implications of scheduling dynamics for work recovery across a range of different work contexts.