{"title":"工作中的生活意义:认知经验自我理论(CEST)视角","authors":"Sharath Baburaj, G. Marathe","doi":"10.1177/20413866231166151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article explores existential meaning-making from work using the cognitive-experiential self-theory (CEST). To start with, we use the tenets of CEST to elaborate on how the cues from archetype work environments—a realization facilitating work environment (RfWE) and justification facilitating work environment (JfWE)—are interpreted by information-processing systems to imbue meaning in life (MiL) as internal or external manifestations of coherence, purpose, and significance. Next, we explain how individual differences in work centrality and proactive meaning-crafting ability moderate the impact of JfWE, but not of RfWE, on MiL. Finally, we create a nomological network of existential meaning states emerging from the simultaneous presence or absence of RfWE and JfWE. In summary, by applying the information-processing lens of CEST, we develop an integrated model that explains how work drives MiL, elucidates the resultant existential states, and assesses the role of individual differences in meaning-making. Plain Language Summary This article develops an integrated model that outlines how work environments can augur human well-being by fostering a sense of meaning in life (MiL). Based on the cognitive-experiential self-theory (CEST), expounding parallel-competitive processing of information through the working of the experiential and rational system, we explore how the cues from archetype work environments—a realization facilitating work environment (RfWE) and justification facilitating work environment (JfWE)—influence the varied flavors of MiL and meaninglessness in life. We build the argument that RfWE activates the functioning of the experiential system to induce a feeling of internal MiL as internal coherence, internal purpose, and internal value significance. At the same time, JfWE triggers the functioning of the rational system to construct a judgment of external MiL as external coherence, external worthy purpose, and external value significance. However, the interaction between RfWE and JfWE can result in intricate scenarios, including favorable states such as holistic meaning, positive existential feelings, and positive existential narratives. Still, it can also lead individuals into meaninglessness in life through existential fatigue, existential cocoon, or existential futility. Nonetheless, individual differences in work centrality and proactive behavior to craft meaning can act as moderators to alter the intensity of work’s impact on MiL in a JfWE but not in an RfWE.","PeriodicalId":46914,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Psychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Meaning in life through work: A cognitive-experiential self-theory (CEST) perspective\",\"authors\":\"Sharath Baburaj, G. Marathe\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20413866231166151\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article explores existential meaning-making from work using the cognitive-experiential self-theory (CEST). To start with, we use the tenets of CEST to elaborate on how the cues from archetype work environments—a realization facilitating work environment (RfWE) and justification facilitating work environment (JfWE)—are interpreted by information-processing systems to imbue meaning in life (MiL) as internal or external manifestations of coherence, purpose, and significance. Next, we explain how individual differences in work centrality and proactive meaning-crafting ability moderate the impact of JfWE, but not of RfWE, on MiL. Finally, we create a nomological network of existential meaning states emerging from the simultaneous presence or absence of RfWE and JfWE. In summary, by applying the information-processing lens of CEST, we develop an integrated model that explains how work drives MiL, elucidates the resultant existential states, and assesses the role of individual differences in meaning-making. Plain Language Summary This article develops an integrated model that outlines how work environments can augur human well-being by fostering a sense of meaning in life (MiL). Based on the cognitive-experiential self-theory (CEST), expounding parallel-competitive processing of information through the working of the experiential and rational system, we explore how the cues from archetype work environments—a realization facilitating work environment (RfWE) and justification facilitating work environment (JfWE)—influence the varied flavors of MiL and meaninglessness in life. We build the argument that RfWE activates the functioning of the experiential system to induce a feeling of internal MiL as internal coherence, internal purpose, and internal value significance. At the same time, JfWE triggers the functioning of the rational system to construct a judgment of external MiL as external coherence, external worthy purpose, and external value significance. However, the interaction between RfWE and JfWE can result in intricate scenarios, including favorable states such as holistic meaning, positive existential feelings, and positive existential narratives. Still, it can also lead individuals into meaninglessness in life through existential fatigue, existential cocoon, or existential futility. Nonetheless, individual differences in work centrality and proactive behavior to craft meaning can act as moderators to alter the intensity of work’s impact on MiL in a JfWE but not in an RfWE.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Psychology Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866231166151\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866231166151","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
Meaning in life through work: A cognitive-experiential self-theory (CEST) perspective
This article explores existential meaning-making from work using the cognitive-experiential self-theory (CEST). To start with, we use the tenets of CEST to elaborate on how the cues from archetype work environments—a realization facilitating work environment (RfWE) and justification facilitating work environment (JfWE)—are interpreted by information-processing systems to imbue meaning in life (MiL) as internal or external manifestations of coherence, purpose, and significance. Next, we explain how individual differences in work centrality and proactive meaning-crafting ability moderate the impact of JfWE, but not of RfWE, on MiL. Finally, we create a nomological network of existential meaning states emerging from the simultaneous presence or absence of RfWE and JfWE. In summary, by applying the information-processing lens of CEST, we develop an integrated model that explains how work drives MiL, elucidates the resultant existential states, and assesses the role of individual differences in meaning-making. Plain Language Summary This article develops an integrated model that outlines how work environments can augur human well-being by fostering a sense of meaning in life (MiL). Based on the cognitive-experiential self-theory (CEST), expounding parallel-competitive processing of information through the working of the experiential and rational system, we explore how the cues from archetype work environments—a realization facilitating work environment (RfWE) and justification facilitating work environment (JfWE)—influence the varied flavors of MiL and meaninglessness in life. We build the argument that RfWE activates the functioning of the experiential system to induce a feeling of internal MiL as internal coherence, internal purpose, and internal value significance. At the same time, JfWE triggers the functioning of the rational system to construct a judgment of external MiL as external coherence, external worthy purpose, and external value significance. However, the interaction between RfWE and JfWE can result in intricate scenarios, including favorable states such as holistic meaning, positive existential feelings, and positive existential narratives. Still, it can also lead individuals into meaninglessness in life through existential fatigue, existential cocoon, or existential futility. Nonetheless, individual differences in work centrality and proactive behavior to craft meaning can act as moderators to alter the intensity of work’s impact on MiL in a JfWE but not in an RfWE.
期刊介绍:
Organizational Psychology Review is a quarterly, peer-reviewed scholarly journal published by SAGE in partnership with the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology. Organizational Psychology Review’s unique aim is to publish original conceptual work and meta-analyses in the field of organizational psychology (broadly defined to include applied psychology, industrial psychology, occupational psychology, organizational behavior, personnel psychology, and work psychology).Articles accepted for publication in Organizational Psychology Review will have the potential to have a major impact on research and practice in organizational psychology. They will offer analyses worth citing, worth following up on in primary research, and worth considering as a basis for applied managerial practice. As such, these should be contributions that move beyond straight forward reviews of the existing literature by developing new theory and insights. At the same time, however, they should be well-grounded in the state of the art and the empirical knowledge base, providing a good mix of a firm empirical and theoretical basis and exciting new ideas.