A curvilinear relationship was posited between job demand and job performance and was tested in a two-year organizational field study involving male youth counselors placed in seven different demand levels. Over the course of the study, these on-call counselors worked in most levels. Composite aggregations of individual self-reported ratings of variations in the job-demand levels were derived. Support for the hypothesized curvilinear relationship was found. Possible implications of the results are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonC. R. (1976) Coping behaviors as intervening mechanisms in the inverted-U stress-performance relationship.Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 30–34.
2.
ChampouxJ. E. (1980) A three-sample test of some extensions to the job characteristics model of work motivation.Academy of Management Journal, 23, 466–478.
3.
CoferC. N. (1972) Motivation and emotion.Glenview, II.: Scott, Foresman.
4.
DuffyE. (1941) An explanation of “emotional” phenomena without the use of the concept “emotion.”Journal of General Psychology, 25, 283–293.
5.
DuffyE. (1962) Activation and behavior.New York: Wiley.
6.
GardellB. (1976) Reactions at work that influence on nonwork activities: an analysis of a sociopolitical problem in affluent societies.Human Relations, 29, 885–904.
7.
HackmanJ. R., & OldhamG. (1975) Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey.Journal of Applied Psychology, 50, 159–170.
8.
KellerR. T. (1981) Job stress and employee performance in a manufacturing plant. Paper presented at Academy of Management Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA.
9.
LindsleyD. B. (1951) Emotion. In StevensS. S. (Ed.), Handbook of experimental psychology.New York: Wiley. Pp. 473–576.
10.
LoweR., & McGrathJ. E. (1971) Stress, arousal, and performance: some findings calling for a new theory.Project Report, AF 1161–67, AFOSA.
11.
McGrathJ. E. (1970) A conceptual formulation for research on stress. In McGrathJ. E. (Ed.), Social and psychological factors in stress.New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Pp. 10–21.
12.
McGrathJ. E. (1976) Stress and behavior in organizations. In DunnetteM. D. (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology.Chicago, IL: Rand McNally. Pp. 1351–1396.
13.
SchwabD. P., & CummingsL. L. (1976) A theoretical analysis of the impact of task scope on employee performance.Academy of Management Review, 19, 23–35.
14.
ScottW. E. (1966) Activation theory and task design.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1, 3–30.
15.
StennettR. G. (1957) The relationship of performance level to level of arousal.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 54–61.
16.
WrightT. A. (1984) Examination of the processes of cognitive appraisal coping and adaptation in an organizational field setting. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
17.
WundtW. (1904) Principles of physiological psychology. (E. B. Titchener, trans.) New York: Macmillan. (Original work published 1873–4)
18.
YerkesR. M., & DodsonJ. D. (1908) The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit formation.Journal of Comparative and Neurological Psychology, 18, 459–482.
19.
ZuckermanM. (1979) Sensation seeking: beyond the optimal level of rousal.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
