An interpersonal perspective of perceived stress: Examining the prosocial coping response patterns of stressed managers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary We adopt an interpersonal perspective and examine the adaptive effects of managers' perceived stress on their behavior towards subordinates. Drawing from the transactional model of stress (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), we advance a model that highlights the propensity for stressed managers to engage in prosocial coping behaviors towards their employees, which in turn are related to lower levels of turnover and higher levels of job performance. We tested our predictions in a sample of 281 employees and their 53 managers working in a clothing retailer in Turkey. Consistent with predictions, we found positive effects of managers' perceived stress on their prosocial coping behaviors and employee outcomes. Managers' perceived stress was positively related to sharing credit with employees for managers who held positive implicit prototypes about employees. Results also indicated that managers' perceived stress was positively related to sharing knowledge with their subordinates regardless of implicit follower prototypes. Both sharing credit and sharing knowledge, in turn, were related to turnover intentions and actual turnover, and sharing credit was related to job performance. This study extends past work by adopting an interpersonal perspective of stress and demonstrating that managerial stress can have positive effects on employee outcomes via prosocial coping behaviors.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".