Publisher
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
Place of Publication
Chattanooga (Tenn.)
Abstract
The aim of the current study is to examine the relationships among workaholism, psychological capital (PsyCap), and well-being. Workaholism is a condition which affects approximately 10% of the U.S. population (Sussman, Lisha, & Griffiths, 2011). Research has found it to be linked to many adverse outcomes, including physical symptoms such as poor overall health (Taris, Schaufeli, & Verhoeven, 2005), as well as psychological symptoms such as work-stress, work-life conflict, and burnout (Clark, Michel, Zhandova, Pui, & Baltes, 2016). In the current research, we are interested in identifying a construct that might ameliorate the negative influence of workaholism on one’s well-being. Research regarding the outcomes of employee wellness programs are mostly inconclusive (Semmer, 2011), alluding to a lack of research on constructs that truly impact employees and their quality of work life. If significant results are found in the current study, this research could better inform organizations on ways to reduce work stress and combat negative effects on physical and psychological well-being resulting from workaholism. Thus, we seek to examine the potentially moderating influence of PsyCap on the relationship between workaholism and well-being. Similar to previous studies, we expect workaholism will be negatively related to physical health (H1a), workaholism will be negatively related to psychological well-being (H1b), and workaholism will be positively related to work stress (H1c). Furthermore, we hypothesize PsyCap will be positively related to physical health (H2a), PsyCap will be positively related to psychological well-being (H2b), and PsyCap will be negatively related to work stress (H2c). Finally, as a cognitive tool, it is hypothesized PsyCap will moderate the relationship between workaholism and physical health such that the higher the level of PsyCap, the weaker the relationship between workaholism and physical health (H3a), PsyCap will moderate the relationship between workaholism and psychological well-being, such that the higher the level of PsyCap, the weaker the relationship between workaholism and psychological well-being (H3b), and PsyCap will moderate the relationship between workaholism and work stress such that the higher the level of PsyCap, the weaker the relationship between workaholism and work stress (H3c). Participants will include full-time faculty and staff members of a large Southeastern university, recruited via an online email distribution service. The hypotheses will be tested using a multiple regression analysis. The interaction effect of workaholism and PsyCap will be assessed. Lastly, a PROCESS Hayes (2014) analysis will be used to examine the potential moderating effect of PsyCap.
Date
October 2019
Subject
Industrial and organizational psychology
Document Type
posters
Language
English
Rights
http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/
Included in
Workaholism and well-being: Psychological capital as a potential moderator
The aim of the current study is to examine the relationships among workaholism, psychological capital (PsyCap), and well-being. Workaholism is a condition which affects approximately 10% of the U.S. population (Sussman, Lisha, & Griffiths, 2011). Research has found it to be linked to many adverse outcomes, including physical symptoms such as poor overall health (Taris, Schaufeli, & Verhoeven, 2005), as well as psychological symptoms such as work-stress, work-life conflict, and burnout (Clark, Michel, Zhandova, Pui, & Baltes, 2016). In the current research, we are interested in identifying a construct that might ameliorate the negative influence of workaholism on one’s well-being. Research regarding the outcomes of employee wellness programs are mostly inconclusive (Semmer, 2011), alluding to a lack of research on constructs that truly impact employees and their quality of work life. If significant results are found in the current study, this research could better inform organizations on ways to reduce work stress and combat negative effects on physical and psychological well-being resulting from workaholism. Thus, we seek to examine the potentially moderating influence of PsyCap on the relationship between workaholism and well-being. Similar to previous studies, we expect workaholism will be negatively related to physical health (H1a), workaholism will be negatively related to psychological well-being (H1b), and workaholism will be positively related to work stress (H1c). Furthermore, we hypothesize PsyCap will be positively related to physical health (H2a), PsyCap will be positively related to psychological well-being (H2b), and PsyCap will be negatively related to work stress (H2c). Finally, as a cognitive tool, it is hypothesized PsyCap will moderate the relationship between workaholism and physical health such that the higher the level of PsyCap, the weaker the relationship between workaholism and physical health (H3a), PsyCap will moderate the relationship between workaholism and psychological well-being, such that the higher the level of PsyCap, the weaker the relationship between workaholism and psychological well-being (H3b), and PsyCap will moderate the relationship between workaholism and work stress such that the higher the level of PsyCap, the weaker the relationship between workaholism and work stress (H3c). Participants will include full-time faculty and staff members of a large Southeastern university, recruited via an online email distribution service. The hypotheses will be tested using a multiple regression analysis. The interaction effect of workaholism and PsyCap will be assessed. Lastly, a PROCESS Hayes (2014) analysis will be used to examine the potential moderating effect of PsyCap.
Department
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. Dept. of Psychology