Stiglbauer Barbara, Penz Marlene
Department of Social Psychology, Personnel Development and Adult Education, Institute of Psychology, Johannes Kepler University Linz.
Department of Work, Organizational, and Media Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Johannes Kepler University Linz.
J Occup Health Psychol. 2025 Aug;30(4):227-254. doi: 10.1037/ocp0000403. Epub 2025 Jun 12.
In occupational health psychology, understanding working conditions has traditionally relied on two approaches: appraisal and structural. While both focus on stressors-differentiating between types (e.g., challenge vs. hindrance vs. threat) and examining their appraisals-the role of appraisal in understanding resources is underexplored. This study therefore investigates job autonomy, a key job resource, through both approaches. Among over 700 German employees who were recruited with the help of an online panel provider, we examined job autonomy and its appraisal as a resource, challenge, hindrance, or threat across four measurement waves spanning 2.5 years. We analyzed cross-sectionally how actual autonomy, combined with individuals' desired levels of autonomy, influenced their appraisals. We also explored longitudinally how both actual autonomy and its appraisals impacted work-related well-being, including job satisfaction, resignation, and cognitive and emotional irritation. Results revealed that higher autonomy was associated with more resource and challenge appraisals, whereas lower autonomy led to more hindrance and threat appraisals. This pattern was particularly evident when actual autonomy levels aligned with desired levels or if desired levels were high. Conversely, a mismatch between actual and desired autonomy reduced the perceived benefit of autonomy. Combining autonomy levels and appraisals enhanced the predictability of well-being outcomes over time, both at the between-person and the within-person level of analysis. In conclusion, this study underscores the importance of integrating appraisal into structural approaches to understanding job resources and advocates for broader consideration of appraisal in future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
在职业健康心理学中,对工作条件的理解传统上依赖于两种方法:评估法和结构法。虽然这两种方法都聚焦于压力源——区分类型(例如,挑战型、阻碍型、威胁型)并审视对它们的评估——但评估在理解资源方面的作用却未得到充分探索。因此,本研究通过这两种方法对关键工作资源——工作自主性进行了调查。在一家在线样本供应商的帮助下招募的700多名德国员工中,我们在跨越2.5年的四个测量阶段考察了工作自主性及其作为一种资源、挑战、阻碍或威胁的评估。我们进行横断面分析,探究实际自主性与个体期望的自主性水平如何共同影响他们的评估。我们还进行纵向探索,考察实际自主性及其评估如何影响与工作相关的幸福感,包括工作满意度、离职倾向以及认知和情绪困扰。结果显示,较高的自主性与更多的资源和挑战评估相关,而较低的自主性则导致更多的阻碍和威胁评估。当实际自主性水平与期望水平相符或期望水平较高时,这种模式尤为明显。相反,实际自主性与期望自主性之间的不匹配会降低对自主性益处的感知。在个体间和个体内分析层面,综合自主性水平和评估能够增强对幸福感结果随时间变化的预测能力。总之,本研究强调了将评估纳入理解工作资源的结构法的重要性,并提倡在未来研究中更广泛地考虑评估因素。(《心理学文摘数据库记录》(c)2025美国心理学会,保留所有权利)