Does engagement help to reduce insomnia when workers are emotionally exhausted?

Digitalization and job stress: exploring the mediating roles of job and personal aversion risk with gender as a moderator

Background

This time-lagged study delves into the impact of digitalization on job stress. Digitalization is defined as the incorporation of digital technologies into various aspects of work life, fundamentally transforming processes, interactions, and decision-making.

Aim

The present research focuses on the mediating roles of job-related risk and personal risk, and the moderating effect of gender. We hypothesized that employees’ aversion to risks, both in their professional and personal facets, mediates the relationship between the rapid digitalization of their work environment and the resultant job stress. Regarding gender as a moderator, recent research suggests that gender can influence the experience of workplace stress, with women often experiencing higher levels of stress than men in certain situations. This indicates that gender might also moderate the relationship between digital living, risk perception, and job-related stress. This approach allows for an examination of the ways in which digital technology adoption influences workplace stress, considering the temporally spaced data.

Methods

Conducted over three waves of data collection among 795 Chinese employees, the research utilizes Hayes’s Model 8, adept at revealing the dynamics of digitalization’s influence in the workplace and its effects on individual well-being.

Results

The study corroborates Hypothesis 1 by establishing a significant, albeit less pronounced, relationship between digital living and job stress. The findings also support Hypothesis 2 by demonstrating that both job risk and personal risk mediate this relationship. The study’s results also validate Hypothesis 3, indicating that gender moderates the relationship between digital living, job risk, personal risk, and job stress. Finally, the significant interaction effects found in the study, particularly the stronger conditional negative effect of digital living on perceptions of job and personal risks for males, despite the absence of statistical significance failed to support Hypothesis 4.

Implications

This study sheds light on the dynamics of job stress in the context of a digitalizing work environment. The results have important implications for designing workplace strategies and interventions that are sensitive to risk perceptions and gender differences in the digital era.

The effect of social support and resource support on emotional exhaustion, insomnia, and suicidal ideation among allied health trainees and post-graduate year doctors in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

COVID-19-related stigmatization refers to COVID-19-related judgements by others that devalue the individual. Such stigmatization towards healthcare workers may cause psychological burden and negative consequences. Such stigmatization may have particularly overwhelmed allied health trainees (AHTs) and post-graduate year doctors (PGYDs) because they just started their medical career. Social support and resource support have been reported to benefit psychological health and reduce stigmatization. Therefore, the present study used a cross-sectional study design to investigate the association between perceived stigma, self-stigma, psychological distress, and negative outcomes (including emotional exhaustion, insomnia and suicidal ideation) among AHTs and PGYDs in Taiwan.

METHODS

An online survey distributed between July and December, 2022 received 522 responses. Variables were assessed using the 21-item Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale, Insomnia Severity Index and a series of self-designed questions to assess social support, resource support, perceived stigma, self-stigma, emotional exhaustion, and suicidal ideation.

RESULTS

Structural equation modeling showed that perceived stigma was associated with self-stigma (standardized coefficient [β] = 0.428, p < 0.001), and self-stigma was associated with psychological distress (β = 0.197, p < 0.001), as well as being associated with emotional exhaustion, insomnia, and suicidal ideation (β = 0.349, 0.556 and 0.212, all p-values < 0.001). While social support and resource support were negatively associated with perceived stigma (β= - 0.175 and - 0.152, p < 0.01), additional associations were found between social support and emotional exhaustion (β= - 0.093, p < 0.001), as well as between resource support and insomnia (β= - 0.120, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that COVID-19 related stigmatization was correlated to the detrimental consequences of emotional exhaustion, insomnia and suicidal ideation. Clear paths regarding the associations of social support and resource support with the three negative associations were found as the possible solutions. Strategies to reduce the stigmatization and these negative outcomes, or improve the psychological health will benefit AHTs and PGYDs in maintaining a healthy mental status.

Association between high emotional demand at work, burnout symptoms, and sleep disturbance among Korean workers: a cross-sectional mediation analysis

We explored the mediating role of burnout on the association between EDW and sleep disturbances. Our study included 18,744 Korean workers. Respondents were grouped into four levels (none, low, moderate, and high) based on their exposure to two EDW factors: handling angry clients (HAC) and hiding emotion (HE). Mediation models were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) at a 95% confidence interval (CI). Compared to those not exposed, low, moderate, and high HAC increased odds of sleep disturbance by 1.52 (95% CI 1.30-1.78), 3.20 (95% CI 2.57-3.98), and 3.28 (95% CI 2.77-3.88) times, respectively. The indirect effect via burnout accounted for 29.9%, 24.1%, and 23.6% of the total effect, respectively, with estimates of 1.13 (95% CI 1.11-1.16), 1.32 (95% CI 1.26-1.39), and 1.32 (95% CI 1.27-1.37). Low, moderate, and high HE increased the odds of sleep disturbance by 1.45 (95% CI 0.93-2.28), 2.38 (95% CI 1.57-3.61), and 3.14 (95% CI 2.08-4.71) times, respectively. The indirect effect via burnout accounted for 10.5%, 29.7%, and 33.1% of the total effect, with estimates of 1.04 (95% CI 0.98-1.10), 1.29 (95% CI 1.22-1.37), and 1.46 (95% CI 1.38-1.55), respectively. Effective policies are required to protect the psychological wellbeing of workers who frequently engage in interpersonal tasks.