Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233–255. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. The jingle-jangle of work–nonwork balance: a comprehensive and meta-analytic review of its meaning and measurement. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72(1), 95–109. Work-life benefits and organizational attachment: Self-interest utility and signaling theory models. Cammann (Eds.), Assessing organizational change: A guide to methods, measures, and practices (pp. Michigan organizational assessment questionnaire. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index: A new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(2), 188–211. Working 9-to-5? A review of research on nonstandard work schedules. Career Development International, 15(5), 501–518. Work schedule, work schedule control and satisfaction in relation to work-family conflict, work-family synergy, and domain satisfaction. When flexibility “works” and when it “fails”: an in-depth analysis of alternatives to the nine-to-five work week. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 78(1), 110–122. Work demands and resources and the work–family interface: Testing a salience model on German service sector employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 496–513. Flexible and compressed workweek schedules: A meta-analysis of their effects on work-related criteria. īaltes, B., Briggs, T., Huff, J., Wright, J., & Neuman, G. A cross-cultural test of a model of the work-family interface. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16(2), 40–68. How effective is telecommuting? Assessing the status of our scientific findings. Work–family conflict and flexible work arrangements: Deconstructing flexibility. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(2), 336–342. Workplace factors associated with family dinner behaviors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58(3), 414–435. Family-supportive work environments: The role of organizational perceptions. Long hours in paid and domestic work and subsequent sickness absence: Does control over daily working hours matter? Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 63(9), 608–616. Īla-Mursula, L., Vahtera, J., Kouvonen, A., Väänänen, A., Linna, A., Pentti, J., & Kivimäki, M. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 569–595. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure: Improving research quality before data collection. What if work and family research actually considered workers and their families? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4(3), 375–378. Eby (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of work and family, (vol. Considering underrepresented populations in work and family research. Enabling control through the availability, use, and encouragement of flexible scheduling among shift workers is associated with a variety of individual and parenting outcomes essential for maintaining health for shift workers and their family members.Īgars, M. Patterns of relationships with similar and unrelated constructs emerged as expected, providing initial evidence of scale validity. The results support the proposed four-factor structure. The final scale is used to predict work attitudes (e.g., job satisfaction, turnover intentions), individual well-being (e.g., work-family conflict, tension, sleep), and parenting (e.g., family dinner, parent–child activity) correlates that are relevant for individual and family health and well-being. A multi-phase approach is used to develop, validate, and pilot scale items. The scale includes four components relevant to the experience of flextime in shift work positions: flextime availability, flextime use, interpersonal consequences, and scheduling consequences. Consistent with research on the benefits of flexibility and nature of shift work, the scale conceptualizes flextime as predictability and control over the timing of work. We develop and validate a flexible work arrangements scale designed for use with shift workers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |