Abstract
Stress-based work–nonwork interference, or negative spillover, is associated with transference of negative emotions from the work to the nonwork domain. It is argued that work–nonwork interference resulting from high work demands does not necessarily entail the reproduction of any affective states. First, calmness can result in lower work–nonwork interference and enthusiasm in higher levels. Second, hindrance stressors can be negatively related to enthusiasm and calmness, while challenge stressors are positively associated with them. Hypotheses about the relationship between stressors and interference that reflect this rationality are developed and tested using longitudinal data from a six-month diary study of portfolio workers. The results offer some support for them and indicate that both challenge and hindrance stressors are positively related to interference. However, for hindrance stressors the indirect effect is positive when mediated by calmness and negative for enthusiasm. In contrast, for challenge stressors the indirect effect is negative when mediated by calmness and positive when mediated by enthusiasm. The mediation paths are significant only for transient effects. Thus, there are indications that well-being can both increase or decrease interference depending on the nature of the stressor and whether it is mediated by calmness or enthusiasm.
Highlights
Greenhaus and Beutell’s (1985) distinction between time-based work–family conflict and strain-based work–family conflict is ubiquitous in the literature on the work–nonwork interface
Prior research has concentrated on how job demands, job stressors or workload increase interference and, while most empirical studies find this to be the case, they do not differentiate between types of stressors (Amstad, 2011; Frone, et al, 1992; Geurts, et al 2003; Michel, 2011)
Through distinguishing hindrance and challenge stressors we have hypothesized that even positive well-being may sometimes increase workto-nonwork interference
Summary
Greenhaus and Beutell’s (1985) distinction between time-based work–family conflict and strain-based work–family conflict is ubiquitous in the literature on the work–nonwork interface Such conflicts are assumed to reflect conflicting role demands, so that meeting a demand in one domain (work or home) makes it difficult to meet those in the other. Strain-based work–family conflict is not about conflicting roles: as Edwards and Rothbard (2000: 182) explain, ‘Strain-based conflict does not connote conflicting demands per se but, rather, indicates that mere participation in a domain can produce strain that hampers role performance in another domain’ It may only be about conflict, in the sense that conflict at work or at home may create negative affective experiences
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
