One size does not fit all : a multilevel exploration of job demands and stress experiences mediated by basic psychological needs and double-moderated by job resources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to explore the link between stressors and strain at work by examining individuals’ experiences of stressors over time. The link between stressors and strain was evaluated with the job demands-resources model. Why people experience the stressor-strain phenomenon was evaluated with self-determinism theory; specifically, satisfaction of basic psychological needs. These needs were examined as a mediator, whose fulfillment was predicted to result in lower strain. That is, it is not necessarily job demands that give rise to strain, but the lack of satisfaction of basic psychological needs. An explanation of why individuals experience stress differently was examined through a dynamic model utilizing multiple time-points and double-moderation. Resources were hypothesized to attenuate the negative relationship of demands on basic psychological needs satisfaction and the negative relationship of basic psychological needs satisfaction on strain outcomes. This model was tested between- as well as within-persons with a weekly 5-week diary study with multiple study groups. The result of this novel approach to examining the relationship of basic psychological needs satisfaction within the job demands-resources model suggest that not all stress is equal. The model was supported in one organization but not the other. Resources played a vital role in satisfying basic psychological needs, and thereby, reducing strain outcomes, particularly at the individual level. Basic psychological needs satisfaction was found to be a mediator with one study group, potentially explaining why individuals feel stressed. Overall, this research demonstrates that it is important to examine stress both across individuals but also compared to the individual’s own baseline. Implications and future research suggestions for individualized interventions are provided to help reduce the impact of workplace stress and provide practical solutions on how to satisfy employee’s basic psychological needs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".