The Relationship Between Dispositional Affectivity, Perceived Income Adequacy, and Financial Strain: An Analysis of Financial Stress Perceptions.

Despite financial concerns representing of the most substantial sources of stress, the intersection between individual differences and financial stress has received sparce attention. Emphasizing the cognitive-appraisal process, our study reveals financial stress perceptions partly reflect a dispositional tendency to interpret financial information either more positively or negatively. Across two studies (N = 441; N = 348), we found that positive and negative affect predict subjective financial perceptions of income adequacy. Further, using Relative Weights Analysis, we demonstrate that in predicting financial stress perceptions, dispositional affect is as important as, or more important than, objective measures of financial stress (i.e., household income and debt). Lastly, using moderated mediation, we found that both current and future perceived income adequacy mediate the relationship between one's income and their experience of affective financial strain, and dispositional affect moderates this relationship. Our work informs current research and interventions seeking to understand individual differences in financial stress perceptions.

Stigma at work: The psychological costs and benefits of the pressure to work safely.

INTRODUCTION: Workplace accidents and injuries can be quite costly to both individual employees and their organizations. While safety climate (i.e., perceptions of policies and procedures related to safety that should reflect an organization's value of safety) has been established as a predictor of safety behaviors, less research has considered the possible negative pressures that could result from an environment that emphasizes safety. Though organizations may intend to create a positive safety climate, concerns about being treated differently if an employee were to be involved in a safety incident may result in unintended, but detrimental safety and health outcomes. METHOD: This study investigated the stigma associated with being involved in a safety-related incident in relation to self-reported safety behaviors and psychological health outcomes. The data were acquired through a two-wave prospective design, surveying workers from Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk; N = 528) who indicated they were exposed to at least one physical work stressor (e.g., heavy lifting; air quality; standing for extended periods) a few times each month or more. RESULTS: When controlling for safety climate, safety stigma was related to decreased safety compliance and poorer psychological health. There was a marginally significant interaction between safety stigma and safety motivation in relation to safety compliance. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that experiencing pressure to work safely, for fear of being evaluated negatively, may actually come at the cost of employees' safety compliance and psychological health. Practical applications: These results may be useful in assessing and intervening to improve an organization's safety climate. Organizations should closely examine the climate for safety to ensure that positive aspects of safety are not undermined by a stigmatizing pressure associated with safety in the work environment.