Work–home interference: How does it manifest itself from day to day?

Abstract Although work–home interference (WHI) refers to a process of negative interaction between the work and home domains, little attention has been paid to the actual processes involved in the within-person, day-to-day management of work and home. Therefore, this study investigated if, and how, a global report for the individual, of WHI (i.e., a general indicator of experienced WHI) is reflected in daily reports of WHI, in employees’ daily activity patterns in the work and home domain, and in their daily health and well-being. Effort-Recovery theory (Meijman & Mulder, 1998) provided the theoretical basis for this study. Data were collected among 120 academic staff members (62% male) who completed a general questionnaire, addressing global WHI as well as demographical information, and who also participated in a 5-day daily diary study. WHI was measured using the 8-item WHI subscale of the Survey Work–home Interaction Nijmegen (SWING), with an adapted version being used for the diary studies. Results showed that global WHI: (1) was positively related to daily WHI; (2) was positively related to the time spent daily on overtime work in the evening; (3) was negatively related to the time spent daily on low-effort activities; and (4) was positively related to daily fatigue and sleep complaints. We conclude that Effort-Recovery theory seems promising for the study of WHI, and that diary studies are valuable, as these provide detailed insight into what global reports of WHI actually signify from day to day.

[1]  Toon W. Taris,et al.  Recovery opportunities, work – home interference, and well-being among managers , 2006 .

[2]  M. Kompier,et al.  Work-home interaction from a work psychological perspective: Development and validation of a new questionnaire, the SWING , 2005 .

[3]  Adam B. Butler,et al.  Extending the demands‐control model: A daily diary study of job characteristics, work‐family conflict and work‐family facilitation , 2005 .

[4]  M. Kompier,et al.  Disentangling the causal relationships between work-home interference and employee health. , 2005, Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health.

[5]  W. Casper,et al.  Work and family research in IO/OB: Content analysis and review of the literature (1980–2002) , 2005 .

[6]  M. Kompier,et al.  JOB CHARACTERISTICS AND LEARNING BEHAVIOR: REVIEW AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MECHANISMS , 2004 .

[7]  R. Rau,et al.  Overtime in Relation to Blood Pressure and Mood During Work, Leisure, and Night Time , 2004 .

[8]  Ijmert Kant,et al.  Impact of worktime arrangements on work-home interference among Dutch employees. , 2004, Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health.

[9]  Jelte M. Wicherts,et al.  Modelpassing van de Verkorte Profile of Mood States en meetinvariantie over mannen en vrouwen , 2004 .

[10]  Arnold B. Bakker,et al.  The loss spiral of work pressure, work-home interference and exhaustion: Reciprocal relations in a three-wave study , 2004 .

[11]  N. Semmer,et al.  BEYOND SELF-REPORT: USING OBSERVATIONAL, PHYSIOLOGICAL, AND SITUATION-BASED MEASURES IN RESEARCH ON OCCUPATIONAL STRESS , 2003 .

[12]  N. Bolger,et al.  Diary methods: capturing life as it is lived. , 2003, Annual review of psychology.

[13]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[14]  Theo F. Meijman,et al.  Specific relationships between psychosocial job conditions and job-related stress: A three-level analytic approach , 2002 .

[15]  Timothy J. Robinson,et al.  Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications , 2002 .

[16]  Sabine A. E. Geurts,et al.  Work/nonwork interface: A review of theories and findings , 2002 .

[17]  David M. Almeida,et al.  Work–Family Spillover and Daily Reports of Work and Family Stress in the Adult Labor Force† , 2002 .

[18]  G. A. Marcoulides,et al.  Multilevel Analysis Techniques and Applications , 2002 .

[19]  S. Sonnentag,et al.  Work, recovery activities, and individual well-being: a diary study. , 2001, Journal of occupational health psychology.

[20]  J. Sluiter,et al.  The relation between work-induced neuroendocrine reactivity and recovery, subjective need for recovery, and health status. , 2001, Journal of psychosomatic research.

[21]  T. Allen,et al.  Consequences associated with work-to-family conflict: a review and agenda for future research. , 2000, Journal of occupational health psychology.

[22]  C. Rutte,et al.  Antecedents and consequences of work-home interference among medical residents. , 1999, Social science & medicine.

[23]  J. Broersen,et al.  Psychosociale arbeidsbelasting en werkstress in Nederland , 1999 .

[24]  Roel Bosker,et al.  Multilevel analysis : an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling , 1999 .

[25]  Saija Mauno,et al.  Antecedents and Outcomes of Work-Family Conflict Among Employed Women and Men in Finland , 1998 .

[26]  T. Meijman.  Psychological Aspects of Workload , 1998 .

[27]  Michael R. Frone,et al.  Relation of work–family conflict to health outcomes: A four-year longitudinal study of employed parents , 1997 .

[28]  Michael P. Leiter,et al.  Work, Home, and In-Between: A Longitudinal Study of Spillover , 1996 .

[29]  Kevin J. Williams,et al.  Role Stressors, Mood Spillover, and Perceptions of Work-Family Conflict in Employed Parents , 1994 .

[30]  Julian Barling,et al.  Daily consequences of work interference with family and family interference with work , 1994 .

[31]  M.J.P.M. van Veldhoven,et al.  Het meten van psychosociale arbeidsbelasting met een vragenlijst : de vragenlijst Beleving en Beoordeling van de Arbeid (VBBA) , 1994 .

[32]  M. Frese,et al.  Action as the core of work psychology: A German approach. , 1994 .

[33]  Robert Karasek,et al.  Healthy Work : Stress, Productivity, and the Reconstruction of Working Life , 1990 .

[34]  G. J. Mellenbergh,et al.  De verkorte versie van de Nederlandse vertaling van de Profile of Mood States (POMS). , 1990 .

[35]  G. Boyle.  A Cross-Validation of the Factor Structure of the Profile of Mood States: Were the Factors Correctly Identified in the First Instance? , 1987 .

[36]  R. Holden,et al.  A confirmatory evaluation of the profile of mood states: Convergent and discriminant item validity , 1985 .

[37]  Jeffrey H. Greenhaus,et al.  Sources of Conflict Between Work and Family Roles , 1985 .

[38]  J O Prochaska,et al.  Factor structure of the Profile of Mood States (POMS): two partial replications. , 1984, Journal of clinical psychology.

[39]  Holger Ursin,et al.  Personality, Activation and Somatic Health a New Psychosomatic Theory , 1980 .

[40]  A F Jacobson,et al.  The measurement of psychological states by use of factors derived from a combination of items from mood and symptom checklists. , 1978, Journal of clinical psychology.

[41]  M. Lorr,et al.  Manual for the Profile of Mood States , 1971 .