Cognitive and Affective Job Insecurity: A Meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 11683
Author(s):  
Lixin Jiang ◽  
Lindsey Lavaysse ◽  
Alexandria Brunkow
Keyword(s):  
Job Insecurity ◽  
Meta Analysis

scholarly journals Psychosocial job stressors and suicidality: a meta-analysis and systematic review

2017 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. 245-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison Milner ◽  
Katrina Witt ◽  
Anthony D LaMontagne ◽  
Isabelle Niedhammer
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Suicide Attempt ◽  
Suicide Ideation ◽  
Longitudinal Research ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Job Insecurity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Job Stressors ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Job Stressor

ObjectivesJob stressors are known determinants of common mental disorders. Over the past 10 years, there has been evidence that job stressors may also be risk factors for suicidality. The current paper sought to examine this topic through the first comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to date.MethodsWe used a three-tier search strategy of seven electronic databases. Studies were included if they reported on a job stressor or job-related stress as an exposure and suicide ideation, self-harm, suicide attempt or suicide as an outcome. Two researchers independently screened articles. All extracted effect estimates were converted to log-transformed ORs.ResultsThere were 22 studies that were included in meta-analysis. Overall, exposure to job stressors was associated with elevated risk of suicide ideation and behaviours. The OR for suicide ideation (14 studies) ranged from 1.45 (95% CI 1.01 to 2.08) for poor supervisor and colleague support to 1.91 (95% CI 1.22 to 2.99) for job insecurity. For suicide (six studies), exposure to lower supervisor and collegial support produced an OR of 1.16 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.38), while low job control resulted in an OR of 1.23 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.50). There were only two studies that examined suicide attempt, both of which suggested an adverse effect of exposure to job stressors.ConclusionsThis study provides some evidence that job stressors may be related to suicidal outcomes. However, as most studies in the area were cross-sectional and observational in design, there is a need for longitudinal research to assess the robustness of observed associations.

scholarly journals Work locus of control and sense of coherence as antecedents of job insecurity

2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 35-43
Author(s):  
J. Pienaar ◽  
H. De Witte
Keyword(s):  
Locus Of Control ◽  
Sense Of Coherence ◽  
Chemical Industry ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Job Insecurity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Work Locus Of Control ◽  
Individual Contributions

Previous research has highlighted various antecedents of job insecurity, both in cross-sectional research and in a recent meta-analysis. A review of this literature indicates that work locus of control actually is the only personality antecedent that has received considerable attention, while sense of coherence may also be an important factor to consider. Data on biographical variables, cognitive and affective job insecurity, work locus of control and sense of coherence were gathered from employees across 3 organisations (N=718), presenting two different sectors (chemical industry and financial services), by means of anonymous surveys. Data were analysed by means of correlations and regression analyses. Results indicate that both work locus of control and sense of coherence play a role in predicting job insecurity, even after controlling for biographical variables. Considering their individual contributions, it is suggested here that sense of coherence may be even more important than work locus of control as a personality antecedent of job insecurity.

scholarly journals Association of Work Risk Factors and the Development of Cardiovascular Diseases: Protocol of a Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Moretti Anfossi ◽  
Christian Tobar Fredes ◽  
Eduardo Quiñelen Rojas ◽  
Jamie Ross ◽  
Jenny Head ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiovascular Diseases ◽  
Job Strain ◽  
Job Insecurity ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Working Hours ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Case Control Studies

Abstract Background: Cardiovascular Diseases (CVDs) are the number one cause of death, representing 31.8% of all global deaths. Several lifestyle behaviours are associated with the development and clinical manifestation of CVDs, however, these behavioural risk factors by themselves do not fully explain the population burden of CVDs. There is increasing recognition that working conditions and risk factors of the work environment are associated with health, including the development of CVDs. We will systematically review observational studies of adults exposed to work risk factors and their association with CVDs.Methods: We will follow the Navigation Guide framework. We will include cohort and case-control studies. The population will be adults of working age (18-65). The exposure will include six categories of work exposure: job strain, effort-reward imbalance, long working hours, job insecurity, shift work and occupational noise; the comparator will be the unexposed group or specified control group. The outcomes will be cerebrovascular diseases, ischaemic heart disease and hypertensive diseases. Published and unpublished studies will be included. The selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, quality assessment and strength of evidence will be carried out by two reviewers independently and disagreements will be solved by a third. Due to the diversity in the populations and exposures in the studies, the synthesis of the results, the quality and the strength of the evidence will be done by a synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM), following the SWiM reporting guideline.Discussion: This systematic review will identify and synthesise the evidence for the association between work risk factors and risk of CVDs. This work will underpin and inform a broader objective to examine the effectiveness of interventions to minimise the effects of risk factors for CVDs in workplaces, with the final aim of informing occupational health policies in the future. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42020179972.

scholarly journals Job insecurity and risk of diabetes: a meta-analysis of individual participant data

2016 ◽  
Vol 188 (17-18) ◽  
pp. E447-E455 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane E. Ferrie ◽  
Marianna Virtanen ◽  
Markus Jokela ◽  
Ida E.H. Madsen ◽  
Katriina Heikkilä ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Job Insecurity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Individual Participant Data ◽  
Individual Participant

No security: A meta-analysis and review of job insecurity and its consequences.

2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 242-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magnus Sverke ◽  
Johnny Hellgren ◽  
Katharina Näswall
Keyword(s):  
Job Insecurity ◽  
Meta Analysis

scholarly journals Perceived job insecurity as a risk factor for incident coronary heart disease: systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 347 (aug08 1) ◽  
pp. f4746-f4746 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Virtanen ◽  
S. T. Nyberg ◽  
G. D. Batty ◽  
M. Jokela ◽  
K. Heikkila ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Job Insecurity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Incident Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Perceived Job Insecurity

Cognitive and Affective Job Insecurity: A Meta-Analysis and a Primary Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 2307-2342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lixin Jiang ◽  
Lindsey M. Lavaysse
Keyword(s):  
Job Insecurity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Theory Development ◽  
Emotional Reactions ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Work Centrality ◽  
Negative Change ◽  
Two Samples ◽  
High Work

Job insecurity is one of the most common stressors in contemporary working life. Although research indicates that the job insecurity construct has cognitive (i.e., the perceived negative change to one’s job) and affective (i.e., the emotional reactions to the potential change to one’s job) components, scholars rarely apply this distinction between cognitive and affective job insecurity in their conceptualization and theory development. On the basis of 535 independent samples, a meta-analysis in Study 1 found that (1) job insecurity was significantly related to 51 out of 56 outcomes and correlates; (2) affective job insecurity had stronger relations with the majority of outcomes and correlates than did cognitive job insecurity as well as explained valid, unique variance in outcomes and correlates above and beyond cognitive job insecurity; and (3) in most cases, affective job insecurity mediated the relationships between cognitive job insecurity and its outcomes. Furthermore, Study 2 examines a moderator that may explain why individuals with the same level of cognitive job insecurity may display different levels of affective job insecurity. Specifically, we found a stronger relationship between cognitive job insecurity and affective job insecurity among individuals with high work centrality with two samples. Overall, results demonstrate that it is empirically meaningful to treat cognitive job insecurity and affective job insecurity as two separate constructs and that affective job insecurity is more closely related to employee outcomes than is cognitive job insecurity. Future research could further assess affective job insecurity and continue to explore moderators and mediators in the cognitive job insecurity–affective job insecurity relationship.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document