Log in to your account
 
Your Community
  • Posted by Jason Hensel at
    12:00AM 07/12/2011 0 Comments

    Work Blamed Most for Unbalance

    Who, or what, do you blame when there's a work-life balance conflict? 

    A new study by Elizabeth M. Poposki, assistant professor of psychology in the School of Science at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, is the first to explore day-to-day experiences in attributing work-life balance blame. Her research examines individual incidents of conflict and tracks how blame for this conflict is attributed.

    Only 3 percent of those surveyed blamed both work and family for conflict between the two. Sixty-four percent of those surveyed blamed work, not family, for conflict. Twenty-two percent blamed only their family role. Five percent blamed external factors other than work or family for the conflict, and only 6 percent blamed themselves for the conflict. There were no gender differences in how blame was assigned.

    Individuals who attributed conflict to external sources rather than blaming the conflict on themselves were more likely to experience anger and frustration following the conflict. According to Poposki, anger and frustration on the job are related to many negative workplace outcomes such as employee theft. Preventing such emotions may benefit both employees and employers.

    Focusing on reactions to the work-family conflict, Poposki found that the order in which events were scheduled was an important factor in attributing blame as the second event, whether work or family related, was more likely to be blamed than the first. This type of conflict might be avoided on both the work and home fronts, she says, by scheduling events in advance. Last-minute office meetings and drop-in visits by relatives were highlighted by those she surveyed as blame targets.

    The 269 participants in the study worked an average of 45 hours per week. All held bachelor's degrees and slightly more than half had received graduate degrees. With an average age of 43 years, two-thirds had spouses who worked at least part-time.

    "A lot of research on work-life conflict exists, but most provides an overview which averages many experiences rather than exploring single incidents and reactions to these incidents," said Poposki, who is an industrial-organizational psychologist. "This study is valuable because focusing on details helps us better understand the mechanisms and processes of conflict. This understanding may be important to future studies of the negative emotional reactions to work-family conflict including anger, frustration, shame and guilt.

    "The Blame Game: Exploring the Nature and Correlates of Attributions Following Work-Family Conflict" was published in the peer reviewed journal Group & Organization Management.

    (Story materials provided by Indiana University.)




  • Posted by Jason Hensel at
    12:00AM 06/03/2011 0 Comments

    The Economy of Attention

    British anthropologist Robin Dunbar once said that our human brains can only handle between 100 and 200 different relationships. 

    I can hear some of you now saying that can't be true, that you have hundreds of friends on Facebook, Twitter, or any number of other social media sites. Enter Bruno Goncalves, Nicola Perra and Alessandro Vespignani at Indiana University.

    They analyzed 380 million tweets sent by three million Twitter users over a period of four years to see if Dunbar's theory holds up. It does. 

    "We found that even in the online world, cognitive and biological constraints holds as predicted by Dunbar's theory limiting users social activities," the researchers wrote

    When someone joins Twitter, he or she will start off with very few friends and interactions. 

    "As time goes by, stable users will acquire more and more friends, but the number of replies that they send to other users will increase consistently only in stable social interactions," the researchers wrote. "Eventually, a point is reached where the number of contacts surpasses the user's ability to keep in contact with them. This saturation process will necessarily lead to some relationships being more valued than others. Each individual tries to optimize her resources by prioritizing these interactions."

    This prioritizing is most notably exemplified by the use of lists on Twitter. Even then, though, I'm sure you can reach a point where you have too many lists competing for your attention. (I have four lists. How many do you have?) 

    In the end, the researchers found that "even though modern social networks help us to log all the people with whom we meet and interact, they are unable to overcome the biological and physical constraints that limit stable social relations."

    I guess my parents' advice was correct: Pick and choose your relationships carefully.