RESEARCH ARTICLE

Coping with Workplace Interpersonal Stress among Japanese Employees Tsukasa Kato*† Department of Social Psychology, Toyo University, Tokyo, Japan

Abstract The current study examined the relationship between coping with workplace interpersonal stress (WIS) and psychological dysfunction (i.e. depressive symptoms, burnout, general distress and daytime sleepiness). Three hundred twenty-four Japanese full-time workers completed measures assessing coping strategies with WIS and psychological dysfunction. Three strategies of coping with WIS were measured: distancing coping, reassessing coping and constructive coping. Multiple regression analyses revealed that distancing coping, which reflects strategies to actively damage, disrupt and dissolve a stressful relationship, was related to high levels of depressive symptoms, burnout, general distress and daytime sleepiness. Reassessing coping, which incorporates efforts to patiently wait for an appropriate opportunity to act, such as a change or improvement in the situation, was related to low levels of depressive symptoms, burnout, general distress and daytime sleepiness. Constructive coping was not significantly associated with psychological dysfunction. Implications for workplace stress are discussed. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Received 29 July 2013; Revised 2 February 2014; Accepted 3 February 2014 Keywords interpersonal stress; coping behaviour; job stress; burnout; depressive symptoms; sleep problems *Correspondence Tsukasa Kato, Department of Social Psychology, Toyo University, 5-28-20 Hakusan, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 112-8606, Japan. † Email: [email protected] Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/smi.2566

Introduction Interpersonal stressors are the most frequently encountered stressors in the workplace (e.g. Long, Kahn, & Schutz, 1992; Smith & Sulsky, 1995). For example, in a study assessing insurance workers (Dewe, 1993), 46.7% of participants reported that problems in interpersonal relationships were the most stressful aspects of life in the workplace during the previous month (e.g. difficult colleague relationships, perceived inconsistencies in management style and demanding client relationships). The effects of workplace interpersonal stress (WIS) can have a detrimental effect on psychological well-being and have been associated with depressive symptoms (e.g. Chung-Yan & Moeller, 2010; Frone, 2000), burnout (e.g. Dijkstra, de Dreu, Evers, & van Dierendonck, 2009) and general psychological dysfunction (e.g. Chung-Yan & Moeller, 2010; Dijkstra et al., 2009), with some theories on depression forming the hypothesis that interpersonal stressors increase the risk of depression (for reviews, see Hammen, 2009; Rudolph, 2009). Research has also shown that interpersonal stressors predict future burnout (for a review, see Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001), which was originally conceptualized as ‘a Stress and Health (2014) © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

psychological syndrome in response to chronic interpersonal stressors on the job’ (Maslach et al., 2001, p. 399). Thus, it seems that depressive symptoms and burnout are strongly related to interpersonal stressors in the workplace. In addition to psychological dysfunction, workplace stressors can also influence behaviour and lead to sleep problems. Theoretical frameworks on the interactions between stress and sleep have been established (e.g. van Reeth et al., 2000), and several studies have demonstrated that job-related stress is associated with sleep problems including insomnia and daytime somnolence (e.g. Doi, Minowa, & Tango, 2003; Utsugi et al., 2005). For example, in a study of 1161 Japanese employees (Nakata et al., 2004), researchers reported that intragroup conflict, a workplace stressor, was significantly associated with an increased risk of insomnia. Therefore, research on WIS may contribute to understanding psychological or behavioural dysfunction in the workplace. Coping with work stressors Extensive research has been conducted, and several theories exist with respect to the effects of coping behaviour on psychological or behavioural dysfunction

Coping with Workplace Interpersonal Stress

in the workplace (see Briner, Harris, & Daniels, 2004; Hepburn, Loughlin, & Barling, 1997, for reviews). For example, according to transactional theory, proposed by Lazarus and colleagues (Lazarus, 1999; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), coping is defined as ‘constantly changing cognitive and behavioral efforts to manage specific external and/or internal demands that are appraised as taxing or exceeding the resources of the person’ (p. 141). This theory hypothesizes that coping behaviour affects psychological functioning, including depressive symptoms, burnout, general distress and daytime sleepiness, and its validity and utility in the workplace have been supported by numerous studies (Lazarus, 1999). There are two approaches to measuring coping behaviour: trait and state. The trait approach characterizes coping behaviour as a style and suggests that it is temporally stable; this approach is not inconsistent with transactional theory (Ptacek, Smith, Raffety, & Lindgren, 2008). Previous research has provided evidence that some coping styles are associated with psychological dysfunction in the workplace (see Hepburn et al., 1997, for reviews). Moreover, research indicates that coping behaviour is relatively fixed across time and individuals use specific coping strategies repeatedly over long periods (see Ptacek et al., 2008, for a review). Therefore, in the present study, we examined relationship coping style as a trait rather than a state characteristic. Furthermore, according to Hepburn et al. (1997), a trait approach to coping behaviour addresses chronic work stressors more effectively than a state approach. Coping with interpersonal stressors Kato (2013) defined interpersonal stressors as ‘stressful episodes between two or more people that involve quarrels, arguments, negative attitudes or behavior, an uncomfortable atmosphere during a conversation or activity, and concern about hurting others’ feelings’ (p. 100); Kato (2013) proposed three types of coping strategies, based on transactional theory, for dealing with interpersonal stressors. According to research on how college students and workers deal with interpersonal stressors, the following coping strategies were identified: distancing coping, reassessing coping and constructive coping. Distancing coping reflects strategies that attempt to actively damage, disrupt and dissolve a stressful relationship (e.g. avoiding contact with the person and ignoring the person), which may lead to poor interpersonal relationships in the workplace. The deterioration of interpersonal relationships at work can produce psychological and physiological dysfunctions (for a review, see Viswesvaran, Sanchez, & Fisher, 1999), and indeed, distancing coping was found to be positively and significantly correlated with depressive symptoms, anxiety and general psychological distress in a study involving Japanese students (Kato, 2013). Reassessing coping incorporates efforts to wait patiently for an appropriate opportunity to act or for

T. Kato

a change or improvement in the situation to arise (e.g. taking a pragmatic view of the matter and deciding not to take the matter seriously). This coping strategy is associated with the concept of detached mindfulness (Wells, 2006), or meta-cognitive awareness (Teasdale et al., 2002), which is a necessary primary skill in clinical interventions based on mindfulness, such as mindfulness-based stress reduction (Kabat-Zinn, 1990), Dialectical Behavioral Therapy (Linehan, 1993) and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (Segal, Williams, & Teasdale, 2002). Detached mindfulness or metacognitive awareness involves decentering or distancing oneself from negative emotions when they are evoked (Segal et al., 2002). Clinical interventions based on mindfulness have provided evidence that these skills reduce psychological distress and promote well-being (see Keng, Smoski, & Robins, 2011; Wells, 2006, for reviews); thus, it seems likely that reassessing coping may enable people to take time to deal with stressful relationships in the workplace, attain a better grasp of the situation, keep their emotions under control and consider appropriate countermeasures. Moreover, reassessing coping may also influence other individuals involved within the stressful relationship(s), helping to change the other party’s mental state and thus permitting them to adopt a calmer, more accepting attitude towards the stressful relationship. In short, reassessing coping enables people to deal with stressful relationships flexibly and increases the likelihood that the situation will improve. In fact, in a study involving Japanese students (Kato, 2013), reassessing coping was significantly negatively correlated with depressive symptoms, anxiety and psychological distress. Another strategy, constructive coping, involves efforts that actively seek to improve, maintain or sustain a relationship without aggravating others (e.g. reflecting on one’s own conduct and trying to understand the other person’s feelings) and emphasizes respecting and living in harmony with others. Research findings on the effects of coping strategies similar to constructive coping on psychological dysfunction are inconsistent (Kato, 2013). Several studies have indicated that such strategies are significantly associated with reduced psychological dysfunction (e.g. Kramer, 1993; Monnier, Cameron, Hobfoll, & Gribble, 2000), whereas other studies have found that they are significantly associated with increased psychological dysfunction (e.g. Londahl, Tverskoy, & D’Zurilla, 2005; SeiffgeKrenke, 2006). However, these studies did not focus on coping with WIS; to our knowledge, no study has examined the relations between coping with WIS and psychological dysfunction. Cross-cultural or indigenous perspectives Coping with interpersonal stressors To understand coping across cultures, an understanding of the cultural differences related to coping Stress and Health (2014) © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

T. Kato

with WIS is necessary. Many Asian cultures have social values based on collectivism and interdependence, as opposed to the values based on individualism and independence prevalent in many Western cultures (Markus & Kitayama, 1991); this cultural orientation has been found to influence individuals’ coping behaviour (Yeh, Arora, & Wu, 2006). Several researchers have suggested that for people in collectivistic cultures, coping is more likely to be directed at protecting interpersonal relationships. For instance, Chun, Moos, and Cronkite (2006) reported that the goal of conflict resolution in collectivistic cultures is not necessarily to remove the conflict, but rather to manage it, because interpersonal conflict indicates disruption or disharmony in relationships. Lam and Zane (2004) found that, in response to interpersonal stressors, Asian American university students engaged in more secondary control coping, which involves changing one’s feelings and thoughts to adjust to the objective environment, than did their White counterparts. Interpersonal stressors in the workplace Several studies in Japan have suggested that WIS is most often experienced in interpersonal relationships with supervisors (e.g. Kato, 2013). For example, 41.2% workers reported that relationships with supervisors were a main source of work-related stress; indeed, this was the most frequently cited workplace stressor (Kato, 2008). Interpersonal stressors in Japanese culture are generally attempts to avoid explicit interpersonal conflict, rather than actual interpersonal conflicts, such as disagreements. For example, Japanese students reported having more frequent experiences of interpersonal stressors—which in this case refer to situations in which people must inhibit their own assertiveness to avoid explicit interpersonal conflict with others—than did students in the United States (Hashimoto, Mojaverian, & Kim, 2012). Overview and hypotheses The present study examined the relationships between coping with WIS and indicators of psychological and behavioural dysfunction, such as depressive symptoms, burnout, general distress and daytime sleepiness in employees. According to previous research, we hypothesized that distancing coping would be positively correlated with psychological and behavioural dysfunction, whereas reassessing coping would be significantly and negatively correlated with psychological and behavioural dysfunction. We examined direct effects of coping with WIS on psychological functioning using several indicators on psychological functioning, rather than moderator/mediator effects of coping. This is because there are few studies that have examined relationships between coping with WIS and psychological functioning. Stress and Health (2014) © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Coping with Workplace Interpersonal Stress

Method Participants and procedure Three hundred twenty-four Japanese full-time workers (147 men and 177 women), whose ages ranged from 20 to 68 years (M = 38.62, SD = 10.38), participated in the study; eight participants did not provide their age. All participants were non-shift workers; approximately 43% were clerical workers, 11% were engineers or engineering managers and 27% were managers or supervisors. In total, 57%, 36% and 6% of the workers had completed graduate education, high school education and post-secondary undergraduate education or vocational education, respectively. Participants were recruited through five manufacturing industry labour unions under the condition that they are full-time, non-shift workers. After signing an informed consent form, all participants completed a set of questionnaires at their workplace within group sessions. All participants received a pen valued at ¥100 (approximately $1.25) in exchange for completing each survey. Measures We measured coping with WIS, burnout, daytime sleepiness, depressive symptoms and general distress. We also assessed working hours because several researchers have reported an association between long working hours and health problems (see Johnson & Lipscomb, 2006, for reviews). In Japan, workers generally work longer hours than do workers in other countries (Otsuka, Sasaki, Iwasaki, & Mori, 2009); therefore, we used working hours to control for the effects of working hours on psychological dysfunction. Three native Japanese psychologists independently translated all measures, originally written in English, into Japanese. The questionnaires were then back translated into English by a native English psychologist. After the back translation, the original and back-translated questionnaires were compared for discrepancies. Modifications were made to the translated questionnaires after a discussion between the translators. Coping with WIS The Interpersonal Stress Coping Scale (ISCS; Kato, 2013) was used to measure coping with interpersonal stress. The ISCS consists of three 5-item subscales: distancing coping (e.g. avoiding contact with the person and ignoring the person), reassessing coping (e.g. taking a pragmatic view of the matter and deciding not to take the matter seriously) and constructive coping (e.g. reflecting on one’s own conduct and trying to understand the other person’s feelings). This scale has demonstrated adequate reliability and validity with Japanese samples. In a study of Japanese participants (Kato, 2013), each coping strategy was associated with theoretically related constructs. Participants were asked to rate the extent to which they used each item to deal

Coping with Workplace Interpersonal Stress

with interpersonal stressors in the workplace on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (did not use) to 3 (used a great deal). The detailed instructions were as follows: ‘Please recall the specifics of your own experiences of stress due to interpersonal relationships. These may include quarreling with others, being talked about behind your back, feeling awkward while speaking, and worrying if you have hurt someone’s feelings. Please read each item and indicate to what extent you used that strategy in the situations you encountered.’ That is, in the present study, we measured coping behaviour as a trait. The fit indices for the three-factor model in the present study were as follows: χ 2(87, N = 324) = 298.1, p < 0.001; root mean squared error of approximation = 0.08, standardized root mean squared residual = 0.08 and comparative fit index = 0.91. Depressive symptoms Depressive symptoms were measured by the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977). The CES-D is a 20-item self-report scale designed to measure depressive symptoms. The Japanese version of the CES-D has demonstrated adequate reliability and validity with Japanese workers (e.g. Iwata, Roberts, & Kawakami, 1995). The Cronbach’s alpha for the Japanese version of the CES-D was 0.90 for a sample of Japanese workers (Kato, 2012). Each item was rated according to participants’ experiences within the past week. Participants rated items on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much so). Burnout The Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey (MBI-GS; Schaufeli, Leiter, Maslach, & Jackson, 1996) was used to measure burnout. The MBI-GS is a 16-item questionnaire designed to measure three components of burnout across different types of occupations. The first dimension is exhaustion (five items), which is the basic individual stress dimension of burnout, and refers to feelings of being overextended and having depleted one’s emotional and physical resources. The second dimension is cynicism (five items), which represents the interpersonal context dimension of burnout; it refers to a negative, callous or excessively detached response to various aspects of the job. The third dimension, inefficacy (six items), refers to feelings of incompetence and a lack of achievement and productivity at work (Maslach et al., 2001). The validity of the MBI-GS scores has been well established for Japanese workers (Kitaoka-Higashiguchi et al., 2004). Cronbach’s alphas for the Japanese version of the MBI-GS subscales were 0.85, 0.87 and 0.81 (KitaokaHigashiguchi et al., 2004). Each item was rated according to participants’ experiences within the past week using a 5-point Likert scale, which ranges from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much so).

T. Kato

General distress The General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12; Goldberg & Williams, 1988) is a general measure of health and psychopathology, which we used to assess psychological stress. The GHQ-12 is a self-report scale with good validity. Reliability and validity for Japanese samples have been verified in several previous studies (e.g. Doi & Minowa, 2003). The Cronbach’s alpha for the Japanese version of the GHQ-12 was 0.88 for a sample of Japanese workers (Kato, 2012). Each item was rated according to participants’ experiences within the past week, following a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (much less than usual) to 4 (better than usual). Daytime sleepiness Daytime sleepiness was measured with the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS; Johns, 1991), which was designed to measure excessive daytime sleepiness. The ESS is an 8-item self-report scale. The validity of the ESS is well established in Japanese samples (e.g. Takegami et al., 2009). The Cronbach’s alpha for the Japanese version of the ESS was 0.71 for a sample of Japanese workers (Kato, ). Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (would never doze) to 4 (high chance of dozing). Working hours Participants were asked to report the number of hours worked per week, which included work in the home as well as work in the workplace. Participants rated working time, during the past month, in units of minutes. To minimize the impacts of extreme outliers, participants’ responses were recoded into nine categories: 1 = 25 h or fewer, 2 = between 25 and 30 h (not including 25 h), 3 = between 30 and 35 h (not including 30 h), 4 = between 35 and 40 h (not including 35 h), 5 = between 40 and 45 h (not including 40 h), 6 = between 45 and 50 h (not including 45 h), 7 = between 50 and 55 h (not including 50 h), 8 = between 55 and 60 h (not including 55 h) and 9 = more than 60 h.

Results Means, standard deviations and alpha coefficients for all variables, as well as the correlation matrix of the correlations among all variables, are shown in Table I. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted on depressive symptoms, burnout, general distress and daytime sleepiness as the criterion variables. Gender (men = 1, women = 2) and working hours were entered in Step 1, and three coping strategies were entered in Step 2 (Table II). For all models, the changes in R2 at Step 2 were significant at the p < 0.01 level, indicating that significant proportions of the variance in all criterion variables were accounted for by coping strategies. The beta weights for distancing coping were significant and Stress and Health (2014) © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

T. Kato

Coping with Workplace Interpersonal Stress

Table I. Means, standard deviations, Cronbach’s alphas and zero-order correlations for this study Correlation

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Variable

M

SD

α

Distancing coping Reassessing coping Constructive coping Depressive symptoms Exhaustion Cynicism Inefficacy General distress Daytime sleepiness

3.92 7.95 7.60 29.61 8.13 5.96 8.74 9.28 11.96

3.12 2.93 2.71 12.38 4.61 3.76 4.37 5.75 3.42

0.84 0.82 0.71 0.91 0.82 0.81 0.89 0.90 0.74

1

0.08 0.17** 0.23*** 0.22*** 0.25*** 0.22*** 0.14* 0.12*

2

0.22*** 0.18*** 0.10 0.12* 0.06 0.16** 0.12*

3

0.00 0.05 0.14** 0.04 0.01 0.01

4

5

6

7

8

0.48*** 0.51*** 0.62*** 0.69*** 0.13*

0.56*** 0.51 0.46*** 0.12*

0.71*** 0.40*** 0.08

0.43*** 0.05

0.08

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

positive in the multiple regression analyses with depressive symptoms (β = 0.27, p < 0.001), burnout (βs = 0.23, 0.24 and 0.23, ps < 0.001), general distress (β = 0.16, p < 0.01) and daytime sleepiness (β = 0.15, p < 0.01). All beta weights, except for inefficacy, for reassessing coping were significant and negative in the multiple regression analyses with depressive symptoms (β = 0.22, p < 0.001), burnout (βs = 0.13 and 0.12, ps < 0.05), general distress (β = 0.18, p < 0.001) and daytime sleepiness (β = 0.15, p < 0.01). No beta weights for constructive coping were significant. Overall, these results were consistent with our hypotheses, although we did not predict for constructive coping.

Discussion The current study examined the relationship between coping strategies for WIS and depressive symptoms, burnout, general distress and daytime sleepiness. Coping with WIS was associated with psychological dysfunction, even after controlling for the effects of working hours. In particular, the strategy for coping with WIS predicted the level of depressive symptoms and burnout, both strong indicators of WIS. Thus, the results suggest that the measurement of coping with WIS is valid. It was hypothesized that distancing coping would be positively associated with psychological dysfunction and that reassessing coping would be negatively associated with psychological dysfunction. Multiple regression analyses revealed that distancing coping was related to high levels of depressive symptoms, burnout, general distress and daytime sleepiness. Conversely, reassessing coping was related to low levels of depressive symptoms, burnout, general distress and daytime sleepiness. Overall, our hypotheses were supported. Our data suggest that distancing coping, which is a strategy that includes damaging, disrupting and dissolving stressful relationships, was related to poor psychological functioning in Japanese employees. This finding is consistent with previous studies on coping with interpersonal stressors. Thus, distancing coping Stress and Health (2014) © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

may not be an adaptive strategy, regardless of culture and context. Distancing coping was associated with depressive symptoms and burnout, which are strongly related to interpersonal stressors. Among burnout, the association between distancing coping and cynicism, which represents the interpersonal context dimension of burnout, was particularly strong. These results suggest that distancing coping is associated with poor psychological health due to interpersonal stressors. Conversely, our results suggest that reassessing coping was associated with low levels of psychological dysfunction in Japanese employees. As mentioned earlier, reassessing coping involves detaching from the stressful relationship and waiting for the appropriate opportunity to act, or for a situation to change or improve. Our results are consistent with the outcomes dictated by theories of mindfulness and with previous evidence on the results of mindfulness interventions such as mindfulness-based stress reduction, Dialectical Behavioral Therapy and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (see Keng et al., 2011; Wells, 2006, for reviews). Mindfulness theories highlight the importance of detached mindfulness (Wells, 2006) or meta-cognitive awareness (Teasdale et al., 2002), skills similar to the concept of reassessing coping. Thus, the findings related to reassessing coping may contribute to our understanding of detached mindfulness and metacognitive awareness. As described earlier, reassessing coping is characterized by keeping one’s emotions under control and reassessing stressful relationship, thus increasing the likelihood that the situation will improve. It may be meaningful for future studies to examine the precise reassessing coping strategies that are effective in reducing psychological dysfunction. Regarding constructive coping, no significant relationships between this strategy and psychological dysfunction were observed, which is consistent with results from other studies involving Japanese students (Kato, 2013). Japanese culture emphasizes respecting and living in harmony with others, and one’s behaviour is based on one’s perceptions of the thoughts, feelings

Coping with Workplace Interpersonal Stress

T. Kato

Table II. Regression results for gender, working hours and coping with workplace interpersonal stress as predictors of psychological dysfunction

Criterion variable Predictor Depressive symptoms Step 1 Gender Working hours Step 2 Distancing coping Reassessing coping Constructive coping Exhaustion Step 1 Gender Working hours Step 2 Distancing coping Reassessing coping Constructive coping Cynicism Step 1 Gender Working hours Step 2 Distancing coping Reassessing coping Constructive coping Inefficacy Step 1 Gender Working hours Step 2 Distancing coping Reassessing coping Constructive coping General distress Step 1 Gender Working hours Step 2 Distancing coping Reassessing coping Constructive coping Daytime sleepiness Step 1 Gender Working hours Step 2 Distancing coping Reassessing coping Constructive coping

95% CI ΔR

2

B

2.51 0.53

SE

1.32 0.30

0.10*** 1.03 0.91 0.41 2 R = 0.12***

0.46 0.66

0.21 0.23 0.26

0.48 0.11

0.06*** 0.34 0.19 0.08 2 R = 0.16***

0.76 0.12

0.08 0.08 0.09

0.41 0.09

0.08*** 0.30 0.16 0.07 2 R = 0.10***

0.07 0.07 0.08

0.65 0.12

0.48 0.11

0.31 0.12 0.01 2 R = 0.06 ***

0.08 0.08 0.09

0.67 0.40

0.63 0.14

0.05***

0.05*** 0.29 0.35 0.13 2 R = 0.08***

0.16 0.05

0.10 0.11 0.12

0.38 0.09

0.04** 0.16 0.17 0.10 2 R = 0.04*

0.06 0.07 0.07

β

t value

LL

UL

0.10 0.09 2 Cohen’s f = 0.11 0.26 0.22 0.09

1.89 1.76

0.10 0.06

5.11 1.13

4.81*** 3.98*** 1.62

0.61 1.37 0.09

1.45 0.46 0.91

0.05 0.31 2 Cohen’s f = 0.06 0.23 0.12 0.05

0.95 6.00***

0.49 0.45

1.41 0.88

4.35*** 2.26* 0.88

0.19 0.35 0.10

0.49 0.02 0.26

0.10 0.07 2 Cohen’s f = 0.09 0.25 0.13 0.05

1.86 1.34

1.56 0.06

0.04 0.31

4.61*** 2.28* 0.86

0.17 0.30 0.22

0.43 0.02 0.09

0.07 0.06 2 Cohen’s f = 0.06 0.22 0.08 0.01

1.35 1.08

0.30 0.10

1.60 0.34

4.03*** 1.38 0.14

0.16 0.28 0.17

0.47 0.05 0.20

0.06 0.15 2 Cohen’s f = 0.05 0.16 0.18 0.06

1.07 2.73**

0.57 0.11

1.91 0.68

2.88** 3.17** 1.07

0.09 0.56 0.11

0.49 0.13 0.37

0.02 0.03 2 Cohen’s f = 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.08

0.41 0.54

0.91 0.13

0.60 0.22

2.66** 2.60** 1.31

0.04 0.30 0.05

0.29 0.04 0.24

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Stress and Health (2014) © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

T. Kato

Coping with Workplace Interpersonal Stress

and actions of others (Markus & Kitayama, 1991); however, strategies that emphasize these values may not influence psychological dysfunction. In addition to Japanese samples, studies with Western samples have also provided inconsistent findings on the relationships between constructive coping and psychological dysfunction. Future studies should further examine constructive coping and psychological dysfunction to better understand their relationship. For example, to address this inconsistency, it may be helpful to explore moderating effects of interpersonal stressors on the relationship between constructive coping and psychological dysfunction. Limitations and future research Despite the strengths, several limitations of the present study warrant caution in the interpretation of the findings. Firstly, the data were gathered from self-report measures via a cross-sectional design; therefore, some of our findings may be influenced by reporter biases due to common method variance (CMV). However, many of the procedures suggested by Podsakoff, MacKenzie, and Podsakoff (2012) to control for common method biases were used herein, including protecting respondent anonymity, reducing evaluation apprehension and the use of reliable and valid measures for each construct. Nevertheless, future research should use other methods to reduce potential CMV biases; moreover, the use of a longitudinal design could also reduce potential biases (Podsakoff et al., 2012). Secondly, because of the cross-sectional design of our study, the causal relationship between coping with WIS and psychological dysfunction cannot be inferred. Although it is difficult to demonstrate that coping with WIS affects psychological functioning, further experimental studies could provide information about potential causal inferences. Thirdly, the interpretation of effect sizes with respect to the relationship between coping strategies and psychological dysfunction should be considered. According to Cohen (1988), small, medium and large effect sizes correspond to f2 values of 0.02, 0.15 and 0.35, respectively. The multiple regression analyses revealed that the proportions of the variance in all criterion variables were significantly accounted for by coping strategies for dealing with WIS. However, the Cohen’s f2 for the impact of three coping strategies in the present study ranged from 0.04 to 0.11 (Table II),

indicating that our effect sizes were small, particularly, with respect to daytime sleepiness. However, the direction of the relationship between each coping strategy and psychological dysfunction was consistent. We might reproduce our findings on the relationships of coping strategies with WIS and psychological dysfunction by replicating further studies. Fourthly, our study lacked a measure of WIS. It is possible that coping behaviour acts as a mediator and moderator on the relationship between interpersonal stressors and stress responses. Therefore, valid measurements of WIS will help researchers better understand the relationships between coping behaviour and stress responses. Furthermore, more information about WIS in Japanese culture may be used to create a framework that could explain the findings presented herein. Nevertheless, future research should further delineate the associations between interpersonal stressors, coping behaviour and psychological dysfunction in the workplace. Finally, in the present study, gender was not significantly associated with psychological dysfunction after controlling for the effects of working hours and three coping strategies on psychological dysfunction. However, we did not examine further gender differences in the variables of interest because gender differences were not a focus of this study.

Conclusions Coping with WIS was associated with psychological dysfunction, particularly depressive symptoms and burnout, which are strongly related to interpersonal stressors in the workplace. Although there were several limitations of the present study, our data indicated that distancing coping was related to high levels of psychological dysfunction and reassessing coping was related to low levels to psychological dysfunction. Conflict of interest The authors have declared that they have no conflict of interest. Acknowledgment I would like to thank Hirokazu Taniguchi for their helpful comments in rewriting an earlier draft of this article. This research was supported by a grant from the Amour-Science Research to Tsukasa Kato.

REFERENCES

(Eds.), Handbook of multicultural perspectives on

Dewe, P. J. (1993). Measuring primary appraisal:

stress and coping (pp. 29–53). New York: Springer

Scale construction and directions for future

Briner, R. B., Harris, C., & Daniels, K. (2004). How do

Science Business.

research. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 8,

work stress and coping work? Toward a fundamental

Chung-Yan, G. A., & Moeller, C. (2010). The

theoretical reappraisal. British Journal of Guidance

psychosocial costs of conflict management styles.

Dijkstra, M. T. M., de Dreu, C. K. W., Evers, A., & van

and Counselling, 32, 223–234.

International Journal of Conflict Management, 21,

Dierendonck, D. (2009). Passive responses to inter-

382–399.

personal conflict at work amplify employee strain.

Chun, C., Moos, R. H., & Cronkite, R. C. (2006). Culture: A fundamental context for the stress and

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the

coping paradigm. In P. T. P. Wong, & L. C. J. Wong

behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Stress and Health (2014) © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

673–685.

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18, 405–423.

Coping with Workplace Interpersonal Stress

T. Kato

Doi, Y., & Minowa, M. (2003). Factor structure of the

Kitaoka-Higashiguchi, K., Nakagawa, H., Morikawa, Y.,

Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D Scale: A self-report de-

12-item General Health Questionnaire in the Japa-

Ishizaki, M., Miura, K., Naruse, Y., … Higashiyama,

pression scale for research in the general population.

nese general adult population. Psychiatry and Clinical

M. (2004). Construct validity of the Maslach Burnout

Neurosciences, 57, 379–383.

Inventory-General Survey. Stress and Health, 20,

Doi, Y., Minowa, M., & Tango, T. (2003). Impact and correlates of poor sleep quality in Japanese whitecollar employees. Sleep, 26, 467–471. Frone, M. R. (2000). Interpersonal conflict at work and psychological outcomes: Testing a model among young workers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 246–255. Goldberg, D. P., & Williams, P. (1988). A user’s guide to the general health questionnaire. Windsor, England: NFER-Nelson. Hammen, C. (2009). Adolescent depression: Stressful interpersonal contexts and risk for recurrence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 200–204. Hashimoto, T., Mojaverian, T., & Kim, H. (2012). Culture, interpersonal stress, and psychological distress.

255–260.

Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385–401. Rudolph, K. D. (2009). The interpersonal context of adolescent depression. In S. Nolen-Hoeksema, & L.

Kramer, B. J. (1993). Expanding the conceptualization of caregiver coping: The importance of relationshipfocused coping strategies. Family Relations, 42, 383–391.

Hilt (Eds.), Handbook of depression in adolescence (pp. 377–418). New York: Routledge. Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1996). The Maslach Burnout Inventory-

Lam, A. G., & Zane, N. W. S. (2004). Ethnic differences

General Survey. In C. Maslach, S. E. Jackson, & M. P.

in coping with interpersonal stressors: A test of self-

Leiter (Eds.), Maslach Burnout Inventory (pp. 19–26).

construals as cultural mediators. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 35, 446–459. Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. New York: Springer Publishing Company. coping.

New

York:

Springer

Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depression: A new approach to preventing relapse. New York: Guilford.

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and

Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Segal, Z. V., Williams, J. M., & Teasdale, J. D. (2002).

Publishing

Company.

Seiffge-Krenke, I. (2006). Coping with relationship stressors: The impact of different working models of attachment and links to adaptation. Journal of Youth

Linehan, M. (1993). Skills training manual for treating

and Adolescence, 35, 25–39. Smith, C. S., & Sulsky, L. (1995). An investigation of

Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43, 527–532.

borderline personality disorder. New York: Guilford.

Hepburn, C. G., Loughlin, C. A., & Barling, J. (1997).

Londahl, E. A., Tverskoy, A., & D’Zurilla, T. J. (2005).

job-related coping strategies across multiple stressors

Coping with chronic work stress. In B. H. Gottlieb

The relations of internalizing symptoms to

and samples. In L. R. Murphy, J. J. Hurrell Jr., S. L.

(Ed.), Coping with chronic stress (pp. 343–366).

conflict and interpersonal problem solving in

Sauter, & G. P. Keita (Eds.), Job stress interventions

New York: Plenum Press.

close

and

(pp. 109–123). Washington, DC: American Psycho-

Japan-U.S. comparison of responses to depression

Long, B. C., Kahn, S. E., & Schutz, R. W. (1992). Causal

Takegami, M., Suzukamo, Y., Wakita, T., Noguchi, H.,

scale items among adult workers. Psychiatry Research,

model of stress and coping: Women in management.

Chin, K., Kadotani, H., … Fukuhara, S. (2009). De-

58, 237–245.

Journal of Counseling Psychology, 39, 227–239.

velopment of a Japanese version of the Epworth

Iwata, N., Roberts, C. R., & Kawakami, N. (1995).

relationships.

Cognitive

Therapy

logical Association.

Research, 29, 445–462.

Johns, M. W. (1991). A new method for measuring

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the

daytime sleepiness: The Epworth Sleepiness Scale.

self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and

Sleep, 14, 540–545.

motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.

Sleepiness Scale (JESS) based on item response theory. Sleep Medicine, 10, 556–565. Teasdale, J. D., Moore, R. G., Hayhurst, H., Pope, M.,

Johnson, J. V., & Lipscomb, J. (2006). Long working

Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001).

Williams, S., & Segal, Z. (2002). Metacognitive

hours, occupational health and the changing nature

Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52,

awareness and prevention of relapse in depression:

of work organization. American Journal of Industrial

397–422.

Empirical evidence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical

Medicine, 49, 921–929.

Monnier, J., Cameron, R. P., Hobfoll, S. E., & Gribble,

Psychology, 70, 275–287.

Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: Using the

J. R. (2000). Direct and crossover effects of prosocial

Utsugi, M., Saijo, Y., Yoshioka, E., Horikawa, N., Sato,

wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain

and antisocial coping behaviors. Journal of Family

T., Gong, Y., & Kishi, R. (2005). Relationships of

and illness. NY: Delacorte.

Psychology, 14, 570–584.

occupational stress to insomnia and short sleep in

Kato, T. (2008). Taijin-sutoresu-koupingu handoboku

Nakata, A., Takahashi, M., Ikeda, T., Haratani, T.,

[Handbook of coping with interpersonal stress]. Kyoto,

Hojou, M., & Araki, S. (2004). Perceived job stress

Van Reeth, O. Weibel, L., Spiegel, K., Leproult, R.,

Japan: Nakanishiya.

and sleep-related breathing disturbance in Japanese

Dugovic, C., & Maccari, S. (2000). Interactions

male workers. Social Science and Medicine, 64,

between stress and sleep: From basic research to

Kato, T. (2012). Development of the Coping Flexibility Scale: Evidence for the coping flexibility hypothesis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59, 262–273.

2520–2532.

Japanese workers. Sleep, 28, 728–735.

clinical situations. Sleep Medicine Reviews, 4, 201–219.

Otsuka, Y., Sasaki, T., Iwasaki, K., & Mori, I. (2009).

Viswesvaran, C., Sanchez, J. I., & Fisher, J. (1999). The role

Kato, T. (2013). Assessing coping with interpersonal

Working hours, coping skills, and psychological

of social support in the process of work stress: A meta-

stress: Development and validation of the Interper-

health in Japanese daytime workers. Industrial Health,

sonal Stress Coping Scale in Japan. International

47, 22–32.

Perspectives in Psychology, 2, 100–115.

analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 314–334. Wells, A. (2006). Detached mindfulness in cognitive

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P.

therapy: A metacognitive analysis and ten techniques.

Kato, T. (in press). Development of the Sleep Quality

(2012). Sources of method bias in social science

Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior

Questionnaire in healthy adults. Journal of Health

research and recommendations on how to control

Psychology. DOI: 10.1177/1359105313482168

it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569.

Therapy, 23, 337–355. Yeh, C. J., Arora, A. K., & Wu, K. A. (2006). A new the-

Keng, S., Smoski, M. J., & Robins, C. J. (2011). Effects of

Ptacek, J. T., Smith, R. E., Raffety, B. D., & Lindgren,

oretical model of collectivistic coping. In P. T. P.

mindfulness on psychological health: A review of

K. P. (2008). Coherence and transituational generality

Wong, & L. C. J. Wong (Eds.), Handbook of multicul-

empirical studies. Clinical Psychology Review, 31,

in coping: The unity and the diversity. Anxiety, Stress,

tural perspectives on stress and coping (pp. 55–72).

1041–1056.

and Coping, 21, 155–172.

New York: Springer Science Business.

Stress and Health (2014) © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.