Contact and impact on the frontline: Effects of relational job architecture and perceived safety climate on strain and motivational outcomes during COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically impacted the relational nature of work, particularly for frontline workers who provide their labor in person. However, little is known about how relational job characteristics during the pandemic may affect workers or how frontline and nonfrontline workers may respond differently. We integrate theory on relational job architecture with the job demands-resources model to understand the effects of contact and impact during the pandemic. We propose contact as a job demand that increases strain outcomes among frontline workers and impact as a job resource that increases motivational outcomes among all workers. In addition, we propose perceived safety climate as a critical resource for mitigating the negative effects of contact among frontline workers and amplifying the positive effects of impact among all workers. We test hypotheses among 452 full-time workers (209 frontline, 243 nonfrontline) using a two-wave survey design. We find no support for the idea that contact operates as a job demand among frontline workers. In contrast, among nonfrontline workers, contact was associated with higher levels of burnout at lower levels of job impact and perceived safety climate. Impact and perceived safety climate acted as important resources among all workers, predicting both motivational and strain outcomes 4 months later. In addition, the positive effects of impact on prosocial motivation were amplified at higher levels of perceived safety climate among all workers. Our results suggest that impactful work, when conducted in a safe climate, is a key resource for enhancing prosocial motivation during crisis situations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The workplace health group: A case study of 20 years of multidisciplinary research.

The Workplace Health Group (WHG) was established in 1998 to conduct research on worker health and safety and organizational effectiveness. This multidisciplinary team includes researchers with backgrounds in psychology, health promotion and behavior, and intervention design, implementation, and evaluation. The article begins with a brief history of the team, its guiding principles, and stages of team formation and development. This section provides examples of the roles, team composition, structure, processes, cognition, leadership, and climate played in the various stages of team development, as well as how they influenced team effectiveness. The WHG formed with functional diversity-variety in knowledge, skills, and abilities-in mind, and the impact of this diversity is discussed throughout the article. Illustrations of how the functional diversity of the WHG has led to real-world impact are provided. The article concludes with some lessons learned and recommendations for creating and sustaining multidisciplinary teams based on the WHG's 20 years of experience and the team science literature. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Impact of a Translated Disease Self-Management Program on Employee Health and Productivity: Six-Month Findings from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Disease management is gaining importance in workplace health promotion given the aging workforce and rising chronic disease prevalence. The Chronic Disease Self-Management Program (CDSMP) is an effective intervention widely offered in diverse community settings; however, adoption remains low in workplace settings. As part of a larger NIH-funded randomized controlled trial, this study examines the effectiveness of a worksite-tailored version of CDSMP (wCDSMP [n = 72]) relative to CDSMP (‘Usual Care’ [n = 109]) to improve health and work performance among employees with one or more chronic conditions. Multiple-group latent-difference score models with sandwich estimators were fitted to identify changes from baseline to 6-month follow-up. Overall, participants were primarily female (87%), non-Hispanic white (62%), and obese (73%). On average, participants were age 48 (range: 23⁻72) and self-reported 3.25 chronic conditions (range: 1⁻16). The most commonly reported conditions were high cholesterol (45%), high blood pressure (45%), anxiety/emotional/mental health condition (26%), and diabetes (25%). Among wCDSMP participants, significant improvements were observed for physically unhealthy days (uΔ = −2.07, p = 0.018), fatigue (uΔ = −2.88, p = 0.002), sedentary behavior (uΔ = −4.49, p = 0.018), soda/sugar beverage consumption (uΔ = −0.78, p = 0.028), and fast food intake (uΔ = −0.76, p = 0.009) from baseline to follow-up. Significant improvements in patient⁻provider communication (uΔ = 0.46, p = 0.031) and mental work limitations (uΔ = −8.89, p = 0.010) were also observed from baseline to follow-up. Relative to Usual Care, wCDSMP participants reported significantly larger improvements in fatigue, physical activity, soda/sugar beverage consumption, and mental work limitations (p < 0.05). The translation of Usual Care (content and format) has potential to improve health among employees with chronic conditions and increase uptake in workplace settings.

Race and Gender Differences in Undergraduate Research Mentoring Structures and Research Outcomes.

Participating in undergraduate research with mentorship from faculty may be particularly important for ensuring the persistence of women and minority students in science. Yet many life science undergraduates at research universities are mentored by graduate or postdoctoral researchers (i.e., postgraduates). We surveyed a national sample of undergraduate life science researchers about the mentoring structure of their research experiences and the outcomes they realized from participating in research. We observed two common mentoring structures: an open triad with undergraduate-postgraduate and postgraduate-faculty ties but no undergraduate-faculty tie, and a closed triad with ties among all three members. We found that men and underrepresented minority (URM) students are significantly more likely to report a direct tie to their faculty mentors (closed triad) than women, white, and Asian students. We also determined that mentoring structure was associated with differences in student outcomes. Women's mentoring structures were associated with their lower scientific identity, lower intentions to pursue a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) PhD, and lower scholarly productivity. URM students' mentoring structures were associated with higher scientific identity, greater intentions to pursue a STEM PhD, and higher scholarly productivity. Asian students reported lower scientific identity and intentions to pursue a STEM PhD, which were unrelated to their mentoring structures.