-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
1/17
The Physical
Environment of theWorkplace as a StressBuffering Mechanism
Phil Leather BA MA PhD CPsychol AFBPsS
Tony Zarola BSc MScAngeli Santos BSc MSc PhD
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
2/17
Research Agenda{ Interface of environmental and occupational
psychology
{ Direct & indirect effects of physical environmentz
Interaction with psychosocial elements (Evans &
Lepore, 1992; Evans et al., 1994)
{ If X under stress, do characteristics of thephysical
environment moderate its impact on well-being?
z Environment as an affordance (Gibson, 1950, 1972)
{ Illustrationsz Windows in the workplace
z Ambient noise & office workz Waiting areas in
hospitals
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
3/17
Windows in the workplace
{ Exploration of
z Direct & indirect effects of illumination,sunlight &
view upon job satisfaction, intentionto quit & general
well-being
z
Interaction with job strain
{ Results
z No effects for illuminationz Consistent direct effect for
sunlight penetration
z Indirect effects for view on some outcomes
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
4/17
Multiple regression on uptight
CumR
Rchange
Fchange t p
Step 1
Gender
AdaptationStatus
.28 .28 12.52***
.25
.43.25
2.85
4.942.92
.01
.001.01
Step 2
Strain
Sunlight
View
.44 .16 8.80***
.24
-.26
-.17
2.90
-3.13
-1.71
.01
.01
nsStep 3
Strain x Sunlight
Strain x View
.48 .04 2.15*
.23
-.33
1.27
-.2.43
ns
.05
*p
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
5/17
Interaction of view X job strain on
intention to quit
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
6/17
Noise and office work{ Negative impact of occupational noise
contingent
upon situational factorsz Job strain valuable way of
operationalizing context
{ Study detailsz 128 government employees (clerical)z Median
split of noise and strain levels (objective noise
range 45-63dB, median=55dB)
{ Aimsz Explore impact of low level noise exposure &
interaction with job strain
{ Resultsz No direct effects for objectively measured sound
z Sound x strain interaction on JS, OC & SID
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
7/17
Anova for job strain x ambient
noise level
Job satis OrgComm Symps ofInf Dis
Job strain 26.03*** 9.07***
1.48
5.69*
8.50**
Noise(dB)
.42 2.16
JS XNoise
20.33*** 4.20*
df (1, 124); *p
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
8/17
The effect of job strain and ambient
noise on job satisfaction
40
50
60
70
80
Jobsatisfactionscore
1 2
low job
strain
high job
strain
low noise
high noise
69.17
60.27
59.04
49.29
60
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
9/17
The effect of job strain and ambientnoise on symptoms of
infectious
diseases (SID)
40
50
60
70
Symptomsofinfectious
diseases
1 2
low jobstrain
high jobstrain
low noise
high noise
45.59
43.17
63.76
49.17
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
10/17
Hospital Design: Neurology Out-
Patients{ Two sample comparative study
{
Traditional and nouveau designs{ 145 neurology out-patients
z 81 in traditional
z 64 in nouveau
{ Samples equivalent in terms of:z Gender
z Age
z Patient diagnosesz Self and Medics reporting of pain, anxiety
and
disability
z Weight
z Smoking
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
11/17
Results{ Significant improvement in PEQI scores
{ No change in self-reported arousal{ Significant waiting area x
time
interaction on self-reported stress{ Significant waiting area x
time
interaction on pulse
{ Significant improvement inenvironmental satisfaction
ratings
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
12/17
Closed
Negative
Boring
Small
Unattractive
Uncomfortable
Depressing
Bad
Unlively
Dull
Unmotivating
Unpleasant
Open
Colorful
Positive
Stimulating
Attractive
Comfortable
Cheerful
Good
Lively
Bright
Motivating
Pleasant
Large
Relaxed
Drab
Tense
1 7
Mean PEQI item score
Traditional clinicwaiting area
Nouveau clinicwaiting area
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
13/17
Waiting Area x Time
(Self-reported Stress)
3.5
4
4.5
5
0 10Time 1 Time 2
Traditional
wa iting a rea
Nouveau
waiting area
4.68
4.34
4.96
3.68
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
14/17
Waiting Area x Time (Pulse)
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
0 10Time 1 Time 2
77.82
73.30
80.34
71.42
Traditional
waiting area
Nouve a u
waiting area
81
80
79
78
76
75
74
73
72
71
77
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
15/17
Conclusions{ Physical work environment both a potential
source of stress and a potential moderator of jobstrain
{ Physical design needs to foster better coping withpotential
job strain
z Assist in coping with task at handz Shouldnt raise obstacles
to coping with task at
hand
z Shouldnt create added stress in itself
z Utilise stress reducing elements{ Sense of control over
physical surroundings
{ Access to social support
{ Access to positive distractions
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
16/17
Questions?
[email protected]
or
[email protected]
-
7/27/2019 Stress Buffering Mechanism
17/17
References{ Leather, P., Pyrgas, M., Beale, D. & Lawrence,
C.
(1998) Windows in the workplace: Sunlight, viewand occupational
stress. Environment & Behavior,30(6), 739-762.
{ Leather, P., Beale, D. & Sullivan, L. (2003) Noise,
psychosocial stress and their interaction in theworkplace.
Journal of Environmental Psychology,23, 213-222.
{ Leather, P., Beale, D. & Santos, A., Watts, J. &
Lee, L. (2003). Outcomes of environmentalappraisal of different
hospital waiting areas.Environment & Behavior, 35(6),
842-869.
