Organizational Behavior and Social Psychology

Executive function deficits mediate the relationship between employees’ ADHD and job burnout

Abstract

Adults with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) often face significant deficits in executive function and adverse work-related outcomes. This study aimed to explore the role of executive function deficits in job burnout of employees with ADHD. We hypothesized that employees with ADHD, relative to employees without ADHD, will experience higher levels of job burnout and deficits in executive function. We also hypothesized that the ADHD-job burnout relationship would be mediated through executive function deficits, specifically by selfmanagement to time and self-organization/problem-solving. A field study with 171 employees provided support for the research hypotheses and mediation model in which the employees’ ADHD-job burnout relationship was mediated through executive function deficits. Additional mediation analyses indicated that the specific executive function of self-management to time and self-organization/problem-solving mediated the effect of ADHD on job burnout and its facets. Specifically, for physical fatigue, the mediation was realized through self-management to time, and for emotional exhaustion and cognitive weariness, the mediation was significant through selforganization/problem-solving. The present findings shed light on the relevance of referring ADHD among employees, their vulnerability to job burnout, and the role of executive function deficits in job burnout of employees with ADHD.
Guy Itzchakov, Geoffrey Haddock and Sarah Smith
|
Listening
Listening is essential in shaping social interactions, relationships and communication. While listening research has generated significant insights on how speakers benefit from good listening, one fundamental question has been largely overlooked: how do people perceive listeners? This gap is crucial for understanding how perceptions of listeners impact relational dynamics. In three studies (two preregistered; total N = 1509), we assessed the attributes and behaviours associated with good and bad listeners, and whether the favourability of these attributes and behaviours impact downstream consequences. In Study 1, participants identified an acquaintance they judged as a good or bad listener. Good listeners were rated higher in positive listening attributes and behaviours, which mediated their perceived warmth, competence and values. Study 2 replicated this using a reverse correlation technique: one sample generated faces of a good or bad listener, which were then evaluated by a second, naïve sample. Consistent with Study 1, good listener faces were rated higher in positive listening attributes and behaviours, mediating perceptions of warmth, competence, humility and values. Study 3 extended Study 2 by showing that the effects were not due to a general positivity bias, demonstrating the significant interpersonal consequences of being perceived as a good or bad listener.
Keep reading
Guy Itzchakov, Moty Amar, Frenk Van Harreveld
|
Attitudes
Purchasing decisions are increasingly based on reviews by fellow consumers which often consist of positive and negative evaluations about the product (i.e. valence- inconsistency). We tested how the vividness of these reviews affects individuals' attitude ambivalence towards the product and their strategies to cope with this ambivalence. We hypothesized that reading vivid and valence-inconsistent reviews would lead to increased awareness of opposing features of attitudes towards the product (i.e. increased simultaneous accessibility) as compared to reading less vivid valence-inconsistent reviews. If this is indeed the case, individuals should feel more conflicted towards the attitude object (i.e. increased subjective ambivalence) and should be motivated to reduce it by using ambivalence-coping strategies, specifically (a) processing additional information that is congruent with their initial attitude and (b) delaying their decision. These hypotheses were mostly supported across five experiments. The experiments included manipulations of valence-inconsistent information between reviews and within a review including three pre- registered studies (Ns = 247, 396, 701, 433, 313, respectively).
Keep reading