Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- Archeology (1)
- Climate change (1)
- Collective resilience factor (1)
- Floods (1)
- Social identity (1)
- communication (1)
- e-leadership (1)
- email (1)
- face-to-face (1)
- leadership (1)
Institute
Research on collective resilience processes still lacks a detailed understanding of psychological mechanisms at work when groups cope with adverse conditions, i.e., long-term processes, and how such mechanisms affect physical and mental well-being. As collective resilience will play a crucial part in facing looming climate change-related events such as floods, it is important to investigate these processes further. To this end, this study takes a novel holistic approach by combining resilience research, social psychology, and an archeological perspective to investigate the role of social identity as a collective resilience factor in the past and present. We hypothesize that social identification buffers against the negative effects of environmental threats in participants, which increases somatic symptoms related to stress, in a North Sea region historically prone to floods. A cross-sectional study (N = 182) was conducted to analyze the moderating effects of social identification on the relations between perceived threat of North Sea floods and both well-being and life satisfaction. The results support our hypothesis that social identification attenuates the relationship between threat perception and well-being, such that the relation is weaker for more strongly identified individuals. Contrary to our expectations, we did not find this buffering effect to be present for life satisfaction. Future resilience studies should further explore social identity as a resilience factor and how it operates in reducing environmental stress put on individuals and groups. Further, to help communities living in flood-prone areas better cope with future environmental stress, we recommend implementing interventions strengthening their social identities and hence collective resilience.
The present research investigates if and how a more digitally centered communication between supervisors and employees satisfies employees’ needs regarding the communication with their supervisors and influences employees’ attitudes toward the supervisor and the job. In a cross-sectional online study, 261 employees rated their supervisors’ actual and ideal use of different communication channels (i.e., telephone, face-to-face, email) regarding quality and quantity. Employees’ job satisfaction and their perceptions of their supervisors’ effectiveness and team identification were measured as dependent variables. Employees perceived face-to-face communication to be of higher quality than telephone and email communication, and they indicated a preference for more face-to-face communication with their supervisors than they actually had. Moreover, the perceived quality of communication, especially via face-to-face, was strongly and positively related to the dependent variables. These results provide insights into potential problems of increasing e-leadership in organizations. We conclude with recommendations to reduce these problems.
The papers in this Special Issue Part I “Revisioning, Rethinking, Restructuring Gender at Work: Quo Vadis Gender Stereotypes?” focus on the current state of gender inequality, particularly stereotypes. We present studies showing that differences in gender stereotypes still exist, confirm disadvantages for women in male-dominated roles and sectors and when the employment sector is not specified, but also disadvantages for men in female-dominated roles and sectors. In contrast to this general trend, one paper in Part II of this Special Issue found a preference for women over men as job candidates in their study. Incongruence emerged as a striking common theme to explain these gender differences, whereby some studies focused on the perceived incongruence from the actor's perspective and how external factors contribute to these perceptions, whereas others looked at the perceived incongruence from the observer's perspective. We summarize the papers and briefly discuss the key points of Part I at the end of this editorial.