Melba C. Stetz

The importance of self-efficacy in the moderating effects of social support on stressor–strain relationships

Abstract Occupational stress research offers inconsistent findings on the moderating effects of social support on the stressor–strain relationship. This study contributes to the research literature by examining how social supports moderating effect is dependent on ones self-efficacy. Ninety-six US military police soldiers completed two surveys 3 months apart. The results showed that three out of four regression equations had significant three-way interactions. Organizational constraints×supervisor support×self-efficacy had statistically significant interactions in the prediction of job satisfaction and psychological well-being. Organizational constraints×co-worker support×self-efficacy had a significant interaction in the predicted of psychological well-being. These interactions explained between 5% and 10% of the variance in the dependent variables. Social support buffered the stressor–strain relationship when self-efficacy was high and reverse buffered the relationship when self-efficacy was low. These results indicate that interventions aimed at reducing strains by increasing social support should consider an individuals self-efficacy. Future research should consider incorporating content of communication to determine if high and low self-efficacy individuals receive or react differently to different types of communication content.

Work-Relevant Values Strengthen the Stressor–Strain Relation in Elite Army Units

We examined in this research whether possessing work-relevant values would lead to stronger relations between different types of stressors and outcomes. U.S. Army Rangers completed the Rokeach Value Survey (Rokeach, 1973) and measures assessing work overload, role clarity, and amount of sleep. Rangers also completed measures of job satisfaction, morale, and psychological distress (depression, somatization, and anxiety). Due to the nature of our sample, we concentrated on the instrumental values (ways individuals attain desired states) contained in the Rokeach Value Survey. A principal axis analysis of these values revealed factors reflecting achievement-related values and affiliation-related values. Moderated multiple regressions revealed that Rangers who scored higher on the achievement value evidenced a stronger relation between the following variables: role clarity and job satisfaction, morale, and somatization; work overload and job satisfaction and morale; and between amount of sleep and anxiety, depression, and somatization. Thus, the achievement value moderated eight stressor–strain relations. In contrast, scores on the affiliation value only strengthened the stressor–outcome relation on three occasions. Discussion of the results focuses on how work-relevant values might amplify the impact of work-relevant experiences.

The receptiveness of stress management techniques by military personnel.

Many military service members suffer from stress. Sixty Soldiers participated in a study designed to test receptivity to stress management techniques. Preliminary analyses of surveys and a focus group suggested that participants not only liked practicing relaxation techniques but would also continue practicing these after completion of the present study.

Mission, physical, and war stressors' impact on aircrew psychological strain.

BACKGROUND Little is known about the relative impact of the organization of missions on aircrew well-being. Using an occupational stress model we investigate a previously little studied concept of mission stressors and determine its relative impact in comparison to physical and war stressors in the prediction of four strains in deployed aircrews. METHOD Questionnaires were completed by 272 deployed in-aircraft crewmembers. Three new stressors were developed for this study: mission stressors, physical stressors, and war stressors. In addition, four strains were measured: PTSD, depression, sleepiness, and nervousness. Regression analyses were used to examine the relative impact of each stressor on the four strain measures while controlling for age and occupation. RESULTS All three stressors played a significant role in the prediction strains with the total explained variance in the analyses ranging from 15% and 39%. Interestingly, mission stressors played the most important role in the prediction of strains possessing the largest partial eta squared in each analysis. The second most important stressor was physical stressors followed by war stressors. CONCLUSION The importance of mission stressors may be because current training is designed to inoculate crewmembers to stressors such as the physical/environmental conditions and violent war actions, but there is no training or acknowledgment of the importance of dealing with mission stressors. Our findings suggest it might be beneficial for commanders to address these stressors, as it may improve short-term psychological well-being, which may ultimately impact mission success and safety.