Affect , and the Demands Control Support Model

The demands control support model (R.A. Karasek & T. Theorell, 1990) indicates that job control and social support enable workers to engage in problem-solving. In turn, problem-solving is thought to influence learning and well-being (e.g, anxious affect, activated pleasant affect). Two samples (N = 78, N = 106) provided data up to four times per day for up to five working days. We assessed the extent to which job control was used for problem-solving by measuring the extent to which participants changed aspects of their work activities to solve problems. We assessed the extent to which social support was used to solve problems by measuring the extent to which participants discussed problems to solve problems. Learning mediated the relationship between changing aspects of work activities to solve problems and activated pleasant affect. Learning also mediated the relationship between discussing problems to solve problems and activated pleasant affect. The findings indicated that how individuals use control and support to respond to problem-solving demands is associated with organizational and individual phenomena such as learning and affective well-being. Learning, Control, and Support 3 An Experience Sampling Study of Learning, Affect, and the Demands Control Support Model Karasek and Theorell‟s (1990) demands control support model (DCSM) is one of the most influential theories of work design. One central idea is the active learning hypothesis: Control and support used for problem-solving are hypothesized to promote learning and, in turn, learning promotes well-being. Another central idea of the DCSM is the strain hypothesis: Control and support are hypothesized to prevent the accumulation of strain induced by demands. The main contribution of this paper is to provide a direct test of the active learning hypothesis. Therefore, the contributions of this paper are relevant to debates on proactivity and work performance (Griffin, Neal, & Parker, 2007; Parker, Williams, & Turner, 2006; Parker, 2007) and cognitive processes in contemporary work environments (Hodgkinson & Healey, 2008; Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). The paper also begins to redress the balance of research on the DCSM that has largely left the active learning hypothesis untested (de Lange, Taris, Kompier, Houtman, & Bongers, 2003; van der Doef & Maes, 1999). Karasek and Theorell (1990) indicate that people use job control and social support for specific purposes. However, most tests of the DCSM infer rather than assess directly the purposes for which people use control and support (see de Lange et al., 2003). We used measures that map onto the theoretical processes outlined by Karasek and Theorell. By assessing specific purposes for which people use job control and social support, we were able to overcome theoretical ambiguities inherent within other tests of the active learning hypothesis. To examine the active learning hypothesis, we used measures that assess the extent to which workers change aspects of their work activities to solve problems and discuss problems with others to solve problems. These measures were indicators of the extent to which workers use job control for problem-solving and support for problem-solving. By taking into account the purposes for which Learning, Control, and Support 4 people use the beneficial job characteristics of control and support, the paper draws links between the DCSM and recent arguments that people actively shape their jobs (Clegg & Spencer, 2007; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). The Demands Control Support Model The DCSM is based on three major components: job demands, job control, and social support (Johnson & Hall; 1988; Karasek & Theorell, 1990). Demands have many components, but are primarily related to expending psychological effort. Examples include time pressures and difficult work. The DCSM originally contained the concept of decision latitude, comprising job control and use of skills. The job control component, the extent of authority to make decisions concerning the job, appears to be more important than the skills component (Wall, Jackson, Mullarkey, & Parker, 1996). Social support is characterized by helpful interactions with supervisors and coworkers. The active learning hypothesis is one of the central hypotheses of the DCSM (Karasek & Theorell, 1990). The hypothesis relates to the processes by which demands, control, and support influence learning and well-being. The other central hypothesis of the DCSM is the strain hypothesis, which relates to how control and support prevent the accumulation of strain caused by high demands. Karasek and Theorell (1990) provide detailed descriptions of dynamic processes that underpin the active learning hypothesis. However, these detailed descriptions have been largely ignored in the empirical literature (for reviews, see e.g., de Lange et al., 2003; van der Doef & Maes, 1999). Most research on the DCSM has assessed workers‟ levels of demands, control, and support, or imputed them from occupational classifications (de Lange et al., 2003). Typically, the active learning hypothesis is expressed as the expectation that the combination of high demands, high control, and high support cause on-the-job learning. Expressed in this way, the active learning hypothesis can be operationalized either as main effects or interactions between demands and Learning, Control, and Support 5 control and/or support. The strain hypothesis is typically expressed as the expectation that the combination of high demands, low control, and low support reduce well-being. This too can be operationalized as main effects, or interactions in which control and/or support buffer the detrimental effects of high demands. However, tested in these ways, the DCSM has only received modest support from the most methodologically rigorous longitudinal studies of levels of demands, control, and support (de Lange et al., 2003). Moreover, simply assessing levels of demands, control, and support cannot provide a precise test of the processes outlined by Karasek and Theorell. It is necessary to examine closely the processes that are thought to underpin the DCSM to provide a thorough examination of the model (van Vegchel, de Jonge, & Landsbergis, 2005). In Karasek and Theorell‟s detailed descriptions, workers are portrayed as active agents that use control and support to regulate work demands for the benefit of their well-being and the pursuit of learning opportunities. Therefore, in the DCSM, it is not the levels of demands, control, and support that are important for learning and well-being. Rather, it is how workers use control and support that is important for the regulation of demands, learning, and well-being. In a small, experience sampling study of workers in a single organization (N = 36), Daniels, Beesley, Cheyne, and Wilmarisiri (2008) indicated the feasibility of using measures that assess the purposes for which people use job control and social support. Although Daniels et al. did not test the specific hypotheses of the DCSM nor did they assess learning, they made links between such measures and a number of dependent variables, including affect. The Active Learning Hypothesis The active learning hypothesis indicates that control and support enable workers to solve problems caused by high work demands (Karasek & Theorell, 1990, p. 36, pp. 69-70, pp. 92-93, pp.172-3). It is proposed that this problem-solving promotes incremental learning as workers find Learning, Control, and Support 6 solutions to problems, which leads to enhanced motivation, feelings of mastery, and well-being (Karasek & Theorell, 1990, p. 99). There are studies that provide evidence for these relationships. Studies have found an association between the availability of job control and on-the-job learning (Bond & Flaxman, 2006; Taris & Feij, 2004; Taris, Kompier, de Lange, Schaufeli, & Schreurs, 2003). Another study found that problem-solving moderates the impact of the availability of job control on well-being (de Rijk, Le Blanc, Schaufeli, & de Jonge, 1998). An intervention designed to facilitate mutually supportive problem-solving reduced levels of burnout (Le Blanc, Hox, Schaufeli, Taris, & Peeters, 2007). The active learning hypothesis makes it explicit that work demands cause specific problem-solving demands, and learning happens when control or support is used to solve these problems. Karasek and Theorell consider that a range of work demands pose problems and challenges, which are overcome through problem-solving. However, problem-solving demands can also be characterized as demands in their own right (Humphrey, Nahrgang, & Morgeson, 2007). Therefore, as our central focus is the active learning hypothesis, we focused on responses to problem-solving demands. To test the active learning hypothesis, we operationalized job control used to solve problems as the extent to which workers change aspects of their work activities to solve problems. This reflects the definition of job control as the extent to which workers have the authority to make decisions concerning how they work, including control over schedules and objectives (Breaugh, 1985). For example, changing work objectives may allow a worker to prioritize solving a problem over other tasks. This operational definition also makes an explicit link between problem-solving demands and the use of job control to solve those demands. In support of this procedure for exploring the DCSM, one study has found that changing aspects of work activities Learning, Control, and Support 7 to solve problems was related to well-being (Daniels et al., 2008). We operationalized social support used for solving problems as the extent to which workers discuss problems with others to solve problems. This definition makes an explicit link between problem-solving demands and the use of support to solve problems. This definition reflects the instrumental and informational aspects of support that are orien