• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

information for practice

news, new scholarship & more from around the world


advanced search
  • gary.holden@nyu.edu
  • @ Info4Practice
  • Archive
  • About
  • Help
  • Browse Key Journals
  • RSS Feeds

Time versus nature: Longitudinal effects of job stressors on work outcomes.

Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol 30(6), Dec 2025, 365-381; doi:10.1037/ocp0000415

Time is a critical factor that shapes stressor–outcome relationships. Despite its importance, few studies have directly investigated the role of time in stressor–outcome relationships. Based on the longitudinal data collected 10 times throughout a year from 101 full-time workers, we explored whether varying time lags influence stressor–outcome relationships and examined the unique dynamics of role stressors (role conflict, role ambiguity, and role overload) and illegitimate tasks with two work outcomes (i.e., work engagement and turnover intention). We analyzed data using continuous time structural equation modeling, which informs the timing and duration of the theorized effects. The results revealed that beyond a certain point in time (e.g., approximately 2 months for work engagement), the stressor–outcome relationships did not substantially differ depending on varying time intervals and showed diluted effects over time. While the patterns over time were similar across stressor–outcome combinations, magnitudes of mean effects varied, aligning with thematic correspondence. When considered together, role ambiguity and role overload, but not illegitimate tasks, had a significant negative relationship with work engagement, whereas illegitimate tasks, but not role conflict and role ambiguity, had a significant positive relationship with turnover intention. Our study offers a more nuanced understanding of the role of time intervals in stressor–outcome relationships. Overall, our results suggest that the time interval alone does not sufficiently explain the varying magnitudes in stressor–outcome relationships and that the specific nature of variable dyads should also be considered. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)

Read the full article ›

Posted in: Journal Article Abstracts on 01/10/2026 | Link to this post on IFP |
Share

Primary Sidebar

Categories

Category RSS Feeds

  • Calls & Consultations
  • Clinical Trials
  • Funding
  • Grey Literature
  • Guidelines Plus
  • History
  • Infographics
  • Journal Article Abstracts
  • Meta-analyses - Systematic Reviews
  • Monographs & Edited Collections
  • News
  • Open Access Journal Articles
  • Podcasts
  • Video

© 1993-2026 Dr. Gary Holden. All rights reserved.

gary.holden@nyu.edu
@Info4Practice