This daily diary study aims to expand the understanding of workplace embitterment (i.e. an emotional response to unjust work experiences) by determining its daily antecedents and consequences. By drawing on the stress-as-offense-to-self theory and the recovery literature we hypothesise that daily illegitimate (i.e. unnecessary and unreasonable) tasks (ITs) relate positively to daily embitterment. We argue that this relationship weakens on days employees experience higher appreciation from colleagues and supervisors than usual. Further, we expect daily ITs to relate positively and indirectly with work-related rumination (i.e. affective rumination, problem-solving pondering) and negatively and indirectly to psychological detachment via enhanced embitterment particularly on days employees experience lower appreciation. Seventy-one employees completed a diary for up to five consecutive workdays twice daily: at the end of the workday and bedtime. Daily unreasonable tasks related positively to embitterment, while higher appreciation from colleagues was found to mitigate this positive relationship. Finally, unreasonable tasks related positively to affective rumination and negatively to detachment via increased embitterment but only on days when appreciation from colleagues was lower than usual. This study expands the nomological network of workplace embitterment and highlights its relevance for understanding daily employee wellbeing.
Burnout, or physical, emotional, and mental exhaustion resulting from chronic workplace stress, is highly prevalent and of high consequence. Most U.S. workers (60%) report experiencing at least one symptom of burnout, and symptoms pose a significant threat to worker performance, worker wellbeing, and workplace operation. Despite burnout's detrimental effects, limited research considers the development of burnout over the early career stage. Applying time-stress exposure and initial impact models, this study uses the Florida Study of Professionals for Safe Families (FSPSF; n = 1,019 individuals, n = 3,424 observations), a statewide, longitudinal cohort study of newly-hired child protective services (CPS) workers, to consider burnout symptoms from 6 months to 3 years on the job. Multi-level mixed effects regression analyses indicated the curvilinear nature of both work - and client-related burnout symptoms over time; the two-year, protective benefit of changing child welfare jobs; and the importance of job attributes in explaining protective effects of job change for work-related, but not client-related, burnout. Findings suggest the importance of targeted strategies to lower burnout (e.g. supervisory support, within-agency job change) particularly after 12-24 months on the job at the peak of burnout symptoms.
This concluding rejoinder responds to the commentaries of De Witte and Schaufeli (2025. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2025.2468715), Demerouti and Bakker (2025. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2025.2473385), and Leiter and Day (2025. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2025.2473152) on our original paper, "Beliefs About Burnout." After clarifying potential points of confusion, we delve into the history of burnout to contextualise the controversies that surround the construct. We note that burnout emerged as a largely predefined entity - an entity whose cause and symptoms were specified before any systematic research was conducted. We then emphasise the need for stricter adherence to the burden-of-proof principle in debates about burnout. We take stock of the disagreements that cut across the field in an effort to reflect on its future. As a general recommendation, we propose shifting the focus from burnout to the core manifestations of human distress - depressive and anxiety symptoms. We contend that the burnout construct offers a truncated view of job-related distress, neglecting crucial features such as worker suicidality and hindering the identification of individuals experiencing clinically significant symptoms. We see little justification for maintaining such a limiting framework. Finally, we underline that the attempt to preserve a distinct "niche" for burnout is at odds with current integrative approaches to psychopathology.
Previous research has found that job demands can have a negative effect on employee physical activity after work. However, the evidence has been mixed and inconclusive. Here, we argue that this is due to most previous studies treating job demands as a broad composite variable, encompassing qualitatively different aspects of job demands. Blending the ideas of the challenge-hindrance framework with the physical-activity-mediated-Demand-Control model, we hypothesise that day-level hindrance demands are negatively related to physical activity, whereas we do not assume such a relationship for challenge demands. Furthermore, drawing on self-regulation research, we argue that the effect of day-level hindrance demands on physical activity is mediated by temporary self-regulatory capacity. We analysed data from 208 employees who participated in a 14-day experience sampling study including two daily reports. Our results support the hypothesis that day-level hindrance demands, but not challenge demands, are negatively related to physical activity. Furthermore, temporary self-regulatory capacity mediated the relationship between hindrance demands and physical activity. In conclusion, our findings highlight the importance of differentiating between challenge and hindrance demands for advancing our theoretical understanding of job demands as predictors of employee physical activity after work. In addition, our research contributes to refining the pamDC model.
