Search

Although research has recognized the straining effects of incivility at work, it is less clear how incivility experiences at home affect employees' daily states and behaviors at work. We argue that partner-instigated incivility-ambiguous aggressions from an employee's partner prior to work may affect helping behavior at work in multiple ways. Building on prior research, which has identified different mechanisms (i.e., resource drain, reactive compensation) linking family and work domains, we argue that whereas partner-instigated incivility may be cognitively depleting, thus limiting employees' capacity to help others, it may also induce negative mood, which may drive employees to compensate for this unpleasant experience by engaging in more person- and task-focused helping behaviors at work. Furthermore, we consider perspective taking as an individual difference with the potential to buffer the effects of partner-instigated incivility on cognitive depletion and negative mood. Results from a critical incident study (Study 1) supported our assertion that partner-instigated incivility is cognitively depleting and inducing of negative mood. In an experience sampling study (Study 2), which included daily reports from employees and their partners who instigated incivility, we replicated the initial effects and found support for a compensation linkage between partner-instigated incivility and both forms of helping at work via negative mood and partial support for the moderating role of perspective taking. Results also indicated that person-focused helping lessened employees' negative mood in the evening, suggesting that mood repair benefits are associated with this behavior. Implications of these findings for family incivility occurrences and self-regulation are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The COVID-19 pandemic propelled many employees into remote work arrangements, and face-to-face meetings were quickly replaced with virtual meetings. This rapid uptick in the use of virtual meetings led to much popular press discussion of virtual meeting fatigue (i.e., "Zoom fatigue"), described as a feeling of being drained and lacking energy following a day of virtual meetings. In this study, we aimed to better understand how one salient feature of virtual meetings-the camera-impacts fatigue, which may affect outcomes during meetings (e.g., participant voice and engagement). We did so through the use of a 4-week within-person experience sampling field experiment where camera use was manipulated. Drawing from theory related to self-presentation, we propose and test a model where study condition (camera on versus off) was linked to daily feelings of fatigue; daily fatigue, in turn, was presumed to relate negatively to voice and engagement during virtual meetings. We further predict that gender and organizational tenure will moderate this relationship such that using a camera during virtual meetings will be more fatiguing for women and newer members of the organization. Results of 1,408 daily observations from 103 employees supported our proposed model, with supplemental analyses suggesting that fatigue affects same-day and next-day meeting performance. Given the anticipated prevalence of remote work even after the pandemic subsides, our study offers key insights for ongoing organizational best practices surrounding virtual meetings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

While some organizations are thriving during the COVID-19 pandemic, many are experiencing a crisis-a threat to organizational longevity, time pressure, and inadequate resources. Building on prior work examining emotions during times of crisis and changes that people undergo during major life transitions, as well as media accounts suggesting that employees have had positive and negative emotions tied to aspects of working during COVID-19, we adopt a person-centric view to examine profiles of monthly emotions regarding organizational reopening. Additionally, we consider how employees transition from one profile of emotions to another across months. In so doing, we consider whether feelings of hope, gratitude, fear, and resentment co-occur for employees; how employees transition across profiles from one month to the next as a function of perceptions of organizational leaders' trustworthiness and their handling of the COVID-19 crisis; and how changes in profile membership relate to employee well-being, work outcomes, and prevention behaviors to avoid contracting COVID-19. Using 1,422 total measurements from August 2020 to November 2020 from employees at a single university during two monthly transitions with significant crisis-related events (i.e., return to in-person teaching, students living on campus, announcement of pay cuts and furloughs, and the subsequent announcement that some of those conditions would change), we identified four profiles of monthly emotions, with perceived leader trustworthiness and handling of the pandemic being critical features of why employees belonged to different profiles between August-September and October-November. Further, we found implications of monthly transitions for work and COVID-related outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

New labor market entrants face significant hurdles when searching for a job, with these stressors likely amplified during the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we consider how COVID-induced job search anxiety-feeling anxious about one's job search due to issues imposed by the pandemic-has the potential to affect adaptive, goal-directed efforts, and maladaptive, goal-avoidant reactions. We theorize that this anxiety can prompt job seekers to engage in problem-solving pondering and affect-focused rumination, with these experiences relating to whether job seekers engage in various forms of search-related efforts the following week. In particular, we consider whether job seekers are engaging in dream job search effort (i.e., effort toward pursuing one's dream job), as well as focused (i.e., effort toward a selection of carefully screened jobs), exploratory (i.e., effort toward a wide swath of jobs in a broad manner), and haphazard (i.e., effort toward applying for any job without a clear plan) job search effort. Further, we consider how stable beliefs relevant to the pandemic (i.e., belief in conspiracy theories; belief in COVID-19 being a public health crisis) affect the aforementioned relationships. Using a weekly study of 162 new labor market entrants, results indicated that COVID-induced job search anxiety positively related to problem-solving pondering and affect-focused rumination; problem-solving pondering promoted dream, focused, and exploratory job search effort the following week, whereas affect-focused rumination hindered dream job search effort. Finally, the detrimental effects of COVID-induced job search anxiety via affect-focused rumination were amplified for those who held higher levels of conspiracy theory beliefs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).