Boredom and engagement at work: do they have different antecedents and consequences?
Michiko Kawada,Akihito Shimazu,Daisuke Miyanaka,Masahito Tokita,Keiko Sakakibara,Naana Mori,Fuad Hamsyah,Lin Yuheng,Kojiro Shojima,Wilmar B Schaufeli,Michiko KAWADA,Akihito SHIMAZU,Daisuke MIYANAKA,Masahito TOKITA,Keiko SAKAKIBARA,Naana MORI,Fuad HAMSYAH,Lin YUHENG,Kojiro SHOJIMA,Wilmar B. SCHAUFELI
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.2023-0028
2023-09-26
Industrial Health
Abstract:This study aimed to demonstrate the empirical distinctiveness of boredom at work and work engagement in relation to their potential antecedents (job demands and job resources) and consequences (psychological distress and turnover intention) based on the Job Demands-Resources model. A three-wave longitudinal survey was conducted among registered monitors of an Internet survey company in Japan. The questionnaire included scales for boredom at work, work engagement, psychological distress, and turnover intention as well as participants' job characteristics and demographic variables. The hypothesized model was evaluated via structural equation modeling with 1,019 participants who were employed full-time. As expected, boredom at work was negatively associated with quantitative job demands and job resources and positively associated with psychological distress and turnover intention. In contrast, work engagement was positively associated with job resources and negatively associated with turnover intention. Thus, boredom at work and work engagement had different potential antecedents and were inversely related to employee well-being and organizational outcomes. However, contrary to expectations, qualitative job demands were not significantly associated with boredom at work. Further investigation is needed to understand the relationship between boredom and qualitative job demands, which require sustained cognitive load and the use of higher skills.
public, environmental & occupational health,toxicology,environmental sciences