Publisher
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
Place of Publication
Chattanooga (Tenn.)
Abstract
Work environments are ever-changing and differ between blue- and white-collar employees. Our goal is to investigate the relationship between occupational category, workplace aggression, and workaholism. The work environment hypothesis emphasizes the role of workplace contextual factors and the work environment on workplace aggression (Salin, 2015). Occupational category, which includes blue- and white-collar positions, is one such work environmental factor. Blue-collar positions are described using manual labor (Finstad et al., 2019), while white-collar positions deal with information rather than things (Anjum & Parvez, 2013). Workplace aggression is the intentional acts by individuals to harm others in an organization or the organization as a whole (Barling et. al., 2009). Work stress leads to higher levels of workplace aggression (Spector & Fox, 2005; Maufi, 2011). In the proposed study, we will investigate the relationship between occupational category and workplace aggression, and examine the potential moderating influence of workaholism. Workaholism, an individual’s compulsive need to work excessively, was chosen as a moderator due to its relation to increased work stress (Glomb, 2002; Clark et. al., 2016). If one occupational category is found to significantly relate to workplace aggression more than the other, this could provide focus for future interventions to target these workers to reduce work stress and workaholism risk. If workaholism is a significant moderator, this will provide incentive for companies to further encourage work-life balance to reduce the risk of workplace aggression and counterproductive work behavior (a form of workplace aggression) incidents. Due to the higher stress associated with the poor working conditions faced by blue-collar workers, we expect blue-collar work to be more strongly related to workplace aggression (H1). White-collar work provides greater access and opportunity to technology that allows for excessive work, along with internal motivation similar to the internal drive of workaholism. Thus, we expect white-collar work to be more strongly associated with workaholism (H2). Due to their similar relationship with work stress, workaholism is predicted to be positively related to workplace aggression (H3). Finally, we expect workaholism to have a moderating influence on the occupational category-workplace aggression relationship, such that with higher levels of workaholism, workplace aggression will increase across occupational categories (H4). Participants will consist of full-time faculty and staff at a large Southeastern university recruited through email distribution. Correlations and multiple regression analysis will be used to test the proposed hypotheses. Hayes’ PROCESS (2014) will be used to determine the potential moderating influence of workaholism.
Date
10-16-2021
Subject
Industrial and organizational psychology
Document Type
posters
Language
English
Rights
http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Included in
The Relationship Between Occupational Category and Workplace Aggression: Workaholism as a Potential Moderator
Work environments are ever-changing and differ between blue- and white-collar employees. Our goal is to investigate the relationship between occupational category, workplace aggression, and workaholism. The work environment hypothesis emphasizes the role of workplace contextual factors and the work environment on workplace aggression (Salin, 2015). Occupational category, which includes blue- and white-collar positions, is one such work environmental factor. Blue-collar positions are described using manual labor (Finstad et al., 2019), while white-collar positions deal with information rather than things (Anjum & Parvez, 2013). Workplace aggression is the intentional acts by individuals to harm others in an organization or the organization as a whole (Barling et. al., 2009). Work stress leads to higher levels of workplace aggression (Spector & Fox, 2005; Maufi, 2011). In the proposed study, we will investigate the relationship between occupational category and workplace aggression, and examine the potential moderating influence of workaholism. Workaholism, an individual’s compulsive need to work excessively, was chosen as a moderator due to its relation to increased work stress (Glomb, 2002; Clark et. al., 2016). If one occupational category is found to significantly relate to workplace aggression more than the other, this could provide focus for future interventions to target these workers to reduce work stress and workaholism risk. If workaholism is a significant moderator, this will provide incentive for companies to further encourage work-life balance to reduce the risk of workplace aggression and counterproductive work behavior (a form of workplace aggression) incidents. Due to the higher stress associated with the poor working conditions faced by blue-collar workers, we expect blue-collar work to be more strongly related to workplace aggression (H1). White-collar work provides greater access and opportunity to technology that allows for excessive work, along with internal motivation similar to the internal drive of workaholism. Thus, we expect white-collar work to be more strongly associated with workaholism (H2). Due to their similar relationship with work stress, workaholism is predicted to be positively related to workplace aggression (H3). Finally, we expect workaholism to have a moderating influence on the occupational category-workplace aggression relationship, such that with higher levels of workaholism, workplace aggression will increase across occupational categories (H4). Participants will consist of full-time faculty and staff at a large Southeastern university recruited through email distribution. Correlations and multiple regression analysis will be used to test the proposed hypotheses. Hayes’ PROCESS (2014) will be used to determine the potential moderating influence of workaholism.
Department
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. Dept. of Psychology