Do individual differences in perceived vulnerability to disease shape employees' work engagement?

IF 3.5 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Personality and Individual Differences Pub Date : 2024-08-31 DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2024.112863
Jian Shi , Alexandra (Sasha) Cook , Mark van Vugt , Arnold B. Bakker
{"title":"Do individual differences in perceived vulnerability to disease shape employees' work engagement?","authors":"Jian Shi ,&nbsp;Alexandra (Sasha) Cook ,&nbsp;Mark van Vugt ,&nbsp;Arnold B. Bakker","doi":"10.1016/j.paid.2024.112863","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The COVID-19 pandemic posed a significant impact on employees' work outcomes worldwide. However, it remains unclear whether some employees fared worse than others when facing work-related health threats and what role individual differences in vulnerability to disease played in shaping their work experiences. Integrating the evolutionary psychology perspective of the behavioral immune system with Job Demands-Resources Theory, we argue that a fundamental factor in how employees dealt with these threats was the extent to which they perceived themselves as vulnerable to infectious diseases. Employees with higher susceptibility to infectious diseases were predicted to experience heightened workplace safety concerns and engage less with their work. In addition, a health-oriented leadership style was expected to decrease employees' safety concerns and increase their work engagement, especially for the more vulnerable employees. To test hypotheses, we conducted a three-wave field survey and two vignette-based experiments on working adults in the United Kingdom at different stages of the pandemic. Results largely supported our predictions, revealing that employees who felt more vulnerable to infectious diseases were more concerned about their workplace safety, inhibiting their work engagement. We discuss these findings' theoretical and practical implications for promoting a safe and healthy post-pandemic workplace, especially for vulnerable employees.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48467,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Individual Differences","volume":"232 ","pages":"Article 112863"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886924003234/pdfft?md5=0e728fdaee6a21d785ffe36a000a9891&pid=1-s2.0-S0191886924003234-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Individual Differences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886924003234","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic posed a significant impact on employees' work outcomes worldwide. However, it remains unclear whether some employees fared worse than others when facing work-related health threats and what role individual differences in vulnerability to disease played in shaping their work experiences. Integrating the evolutionary psychology perspective of the behavioral immune system with Job Demands-Resources Theory, we argue that a fundamental factor in how employees dealt with these threats was the extent to which they perceived themselves as vulnerable to infectious diseases. Employees with higher susceptibility to infectious diseases were predicted to experience heightened workplace safety concerns and engage less with their work. In addition, a health-oriented leadership style was expected to decrease employees' safety concerns and increase their work engagement, especially for the more vulnerable employees. To test hypotheses, we conducted a three-wave field survey and two vignette-based experiments on working adults in the United Kingdom at different stages of the pandemic. Results largely supported our predictions, revealing that employees who felt more vulnerable to infectious diseases were more concerned about their workplace safety, inhibiting their work engagement. We discuss these findings' theoretical and practical implications for promoting a safe and healthy post-pandemic workplace, especially for vulnerable employees.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在感知疾病脆弱性方面的个体差异会影响员工的工作投入吗?
COVID-19 大流行对全球员工的工作结果产生了重大影响。然而,在面对与工作相关的健康威胁时,是否有些员工的情况比其他人更糟,以及个体对疾病的易感性差异在影响他们的工作经历方面发挥了什么作用,这些问题仍不清楚。结合行为免疫系统的进化心理学观点和工作需求-资源理论,我们认为,员工如何应对这些威胁的一个基本因素是他们认为自己易受传染病影响的程度。据预测,对传染病易感性较高的员工对工作场所安全的担忧会增加,对工作的投入程度也会降低。此外,以健康为导向的领导风格有望降低员工的安全顾虑,提高他们的工作参与度,尤其是对那些易受感染的员工而言。为了验证假设,我们在大流行病的不同阶段对英国的在职成年人进行了三波实地调查和两个基于小故事的实验。结果在很大程度上支持了我们的预测,揭示出那些认为自己更容易受到传染病伤害的员工更加关注工作场所的安全,从而抑制了他们的工作投入。我们讨论了这些发现对促进大流行后工作场所安全和健康的理论和实践意义,尤其是对脆弱员工的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.70%
发文量
577
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: Personality and Individual Differences is devoted to the publication of articles (experimental, theoretical, review) which aim to integrate as far as possible the major factors of personality with empirical paradigms from experimental, physiological, animal, clinical, educational, criminological or industrial psychology or to seek an explanation for the causes and major determinants of individual differences in concepts derived from these disciplines. The editors are concerned with both genetic and environmental causes, and they are particularly interested in possible interaction effects.
期刊最新文献
The Golden Mean Inventory: A new approach to studying character strengths imbalances across contexts Inside Front Cover - Ed. Board, Aims and Scope, Copyright, Publication information, Orders and Claims, Advertising information, Author inquiries, Permissions, Funding body, Permanence of paper, Impressum (German titles only) and GFA link in double column ISSID Pages The number of exceptional people: Fewer than 85 per 1 million across key traits Priming moral self-ambivalence facilitates cognitive flexibility in young adults
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1