Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2 Cheng2008 - Who Suffers More From Job Insecurity
2 Cheng2008 - Who Suffers More From Job Insecurity
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2007.00312.x
A Meta-Analytic Review
Grand H.-L. Cheng
University of Queensland, Australia
The present meta-analysis examined the tenure, age, and gender differences in
the relationship between job insecurity and its job-related and health-related
consequences. A total of 133 studies, providing 172 independent samples, were
included in the analysis. Our results basically replicated Sverke et al.’s (2002)
meta-analytic findings with an updated methodological approach and a larger
database. The main differences between our findings and Sverke et al.’s are
that the negative association between job insecurity and job performance was
significant and that the relationship between insecurity and job involvement
was smaller in our study. The moderator analysis also indicated that: (1) the
positive association between job insecurity and turnover intention was
stronger among employees with shorter tenure than those with longer tenure,
and was stronger among younger than older employees; (2) the negative effect
of insecurity on its health outcomes was more severe among employees with
longer tenure than those with shorter tenure, and was more severe among
older than younger employees; (3) the relationship between insecurity and the
criterion variables was similar across gender. Results are discussed with refer-
ence to Hulin’s (1991) theory of job adaptation and Greenhalgh and Rosen-
blatt’s (1984) job dependence perspective.
INTRODUCTION
Job insecurity has received a considerable amount of research attention in
recent years (Sverke, Hellgren, & Naswall, 2002). Numerous organisations
worldwide have undergone downsizing (Armstrong-Stassen, 2004) to reduce
expenditure and raise their effectiveness (Burke & Nelson, 1998). According
to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (2001), a total of 21,345
mass layoffs events occurred there in 2001. Forty-three per cent of the
organisations surveyed by the Society for Human Resource Management
(2001) reported that they had carried out layoffs, with reductions in 10 per
cent and 13 per cent of their locations’ workforces in 2000 and 2001, respec-
tively. Long-term employment has become rare. More and more job oppor-
tunities are temporary or contract-based (Sparks, Faragher, & Cooper, 2001).
All these changes have led to a heightened sense of job insecurity among
the workforce worldwide (Hartley, Jacobson, Klandermans, & van Vuuren,
1991).
The purpose of the present meta-analysis was to examine how three demo-
graphic variables of employees, namely, organisational tenure, age, and gender,
moderated the relationship between job insecurity and its job-related and
health-related consequences. We argue that it is important to examine these
moderating effects for four reasons. First, after 25 years of job insecurity
research, little is known about who would suffer more from job insecurity
than others. Specifically, as described below, there are conflicting views and
inconsistent findings on how organisational tenure, age, and gender may
moderate the effects of job insecurity on its outcomes. The present meta-
analysis will help fill this gap in the job insecurity literature.
Second, investigating the moderating effects of demographic variables
helps advance our understanding of the underlying psychological processes
of job insecurity and is essential for theoretical development in this field. For
instance, Sverke and his colleagues (2002) examined how occupational status
moderates the relationship between job insecurity and its consequences. The
results shed light on how job dependence, which is reflected by occupational
status, moderates the effect of job insecurity on its outcomes (discussed
below). In the present study, through examining the moderating effects
of tenure, age, and gender, we tested predictions drawn from the theory of
job adaptation (Hulin, 1991) and the job dependence perspective (Green-
halgh & Rosenblatt, 1984) on how different employees may react to job
insecurity.
Specifically, Hulin’s (1991) theory of job adaptation suggests how organ-
isational commitment and job involvement may moderate the relationship
between job insecurity and its consequences. While organisational tenure
was not included in the original formulation of Hulin’s theory, it has con-
sistently been found to be associated with organisational commitment and
job involvement (Brown, 1996; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). It is reasonable to
conceptualise the moderating effects of tenure by referring to the theory of
job adaptation. In a similar vein, Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt’s (1984) job
dependence perspective predicts how occupational mobility and economic
insecurity may moderate the relationship between job insecurity and its
consequences. While age and gender were not included in Greenhalgh and
Rosenblatt’s original idea, these two demographic variables are associated
with occupational mobility and economic insecurity (Kuhnert & Vance,
1992; Rosenblatt, Talmud, & Ruvio, 1999). We thus argue that the moder-
ating effects of age and gender can be conceptualised with reference to the
job dependence perspective. In other words, there is theoretical basis for
proposing these moderating effects.
Third, understanding who would suffer more from job insecurity merits
examination because of its practical implications. A sense of insecurity has
a negative impact on employees’ health and elicits withdrawal cognitions
such as turnover intention (Sverke et al., 2002). Health problems and volun-
tary turnover of employees are detrimental to organisational effectiveness
and are costly to organisations (Ramlall, 2003; Sagie, Birati, & Tziner, 2002;
Sparks et al., 2001). It is essential for organisations to know if certain
employees suffer more from job insecurity than others (Probst, 2000; Sparks
et al., 2001).
Fourth, the previous meta-analysis of job insecurity by Sverke et al.
(2002) revealed that there were large variations in the effect sizes of the
relationship between job insecurity and its outcomes. However, some of
these variations were not explained by the moderators identified by
Sverke et al. (i.e. type of measure and occupational status). The present
meta-analysis, using a larger database and different meta-analytic proce-
dures, attempted to extend Sverke et al.’s findings by examining whether
organisational tenure, age, and gender would account for some of these
variations.
the relationship between job insecurity and its consequences. They found
that the negative effect of job insecurity on job satisfaction, trust, and per-
formance was stronger when job insecurity was captured by multiple-item
than by single-item measures. Furthermore, the negative impact of job insecu-
rity on performance and turnover intention was more profound among manual
employees (blue-collar workers) than non-manual employees (white-collar
workers, professionals, and managers). Sverke et al. argued that manual
employees react more strongly to insecurity because these employees gener-
ally have lower levels of education and skills, and are more dependent on
their current jobs.
However, Sverke et al. (2002) showed that type of measure and occupa-
tional status did not moderate the relationship between job insecurity and
its health-related outcomes. This has raised two questions. First, as revealed
by Sverke et al., the effect sizes of the relationship between job insecurity
and its health-related outcomes varied greatly across studies. There should
be other moderating factors accounting for these variations, which were not
captured by type of measure and occupational status. Second, the finding
that occupational status did not moderate the impact of job insecurity on
psychological and physical health left a question about whether job depend-
ence moderates the relationship between job insecurity and its health-related
consequences (see Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984). In this light, we pro-
posed to examine other factors which may account for the variations in the
relationship between job insecurity and its consequences.
METHOD
1
Other potential moderating factors like mood dispositions (Roskies, Louis-Guerin, &
Fournier, 1993) and social support (Lim, 1996) were not included because these factors have
not been examined in a sufficient number of primary studies or cannot be aggregated meaning-
fully for meta-analysis.
prominent scholars in the area of job insecurity and asked them for their
unpublished studies of job insecurity, if any. Twelve scholars responded to
our request.2 Moreover, we inspected the reference lists of the studies
obtained and review papers on job insecurity (e.g. Sverke & Hellgren, 2002;
Sverke et al., 2002) to locate additional studies.
To be included in the current meta-analysis of job insecurity, studies must
be in English3 and measure the subjective experience of job insecurity (e.g.
perceived likelihood of job loss) of employed people. Moreover, they must
report zero-order correlation or other statistics that can be transformed into
a correlation coefficient (e.g. the t-value; see Hunter & Schmidt, 1990)
between individual employees’ job insecurity and at least one of the crite-
rion variables of interest (i.e. job satisfaction, organisational commitment,
turnover intention, psychological health, physical health,4 work perform-
ance, trust, and job involvement). Articles that used multiplicative com-
posites to measure job insecurity were excluded5 (unlike Sverke et al., 2002).
For longitudinal studies, only the first-wave data were considered. Some
papers provided data from the same or overlapping samples, so preference
(in descending order) was given to the one allowing us to test the moderat-
ing effect, including more criterion variables, involving a larger sample and
published most recently.
A total of 133 studies were included in the current analysis (121 published
studies and 12 dissertations;6 all marked with an asterisk in the References
section). These studies provided 172 independent samples, with 132,927
employees involved. The number of independent samples included in our
study was 86 more than that included in Sverke et al. (2002).
2
We thank Marjorie Armstrong-Stassen, Julian Barling, Ronald Burke, Hans De Witte,
Leon Grunberg, Johnny Hellgren, John Kammeyer-Mueller, Ulla Kinnunen, Saija Mauno,
Sarah Moore, Tahira Probst, and Magnus Sverke for their replies.
3
Based on the results of Egger, Zellweger-Zahner, Schneider, Junker, Lengeler, and Antes
(1997) and Juni, Holstein, Sterne, Barlett, and Egger (2002), Dickersin (2005) concluded that
one does not necessarily assume that publication practices are language related. It seems to be
equally likely for both non-English studies and English studies to report statistically significant
results. On the other hand, we should note that excluding non-English studies might have
reduced the number of samples in our analysis.
4
Indicators like anxiety and psychological distress were considered as the indicators of
psychological health such that absence of anxiety and psychological distress implied good
psychological health. Physical symptoms like headache and back pain were considered as
indicators of physical health such that absence of physical symptoms implied good physical health.
5
Evans (1991) noted that it is inappropriate to include the multiplicative composite in
bivariate correlational analysis. Analysis addressing the simple bivariate relationship between
the multiplicative composite and criterion variables is subject to scaling effect and may thus give
rise to spurious results. Meta-analysing such correlations may lead to problematic conclusions.
6
The unpublished studies provided by other researchers did not meet our inclusion criteria
and, hence, were not included in the analysis.
7
Some may question the validity of testing the moderating effect of individual-level variables
such as organisational tenure and age in a meta-analysis. It is because the unit of analysis in a
meta-analysis is samples, not individuals. Mean tenure and mean age of samples are used,
and within-sample variances in tenure and age are not captured. However, we argued that our
predictions were all drawn from theories (our discussions about the moderating effects of
organisational tenure, and the moderating effects of age and gender were based on the theory
of job adaptation and the job dependence perspective, respectively). In addition, it is a common
practice to examine the moderating effects of demographic variables such as organisational
tenure, age, and gender in meta-analysis (e.g. Chapman, Uggerslev, Carroll, Piasentin, & Jones,
2005; Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt, & van Engen, 2003; Griffeth, Hom, & Gaertner, 2000;
Riketta, 2002).
Meta-Analytic Procedures
Hunter and Schmidt’s (1990) meta-analytic method was employed to estimate
the “true” correlations (corrected effect sizes) between job insecurity and its
consequences. Each observed correlation was corrected for measurement
error by taking the reliabilities of job insecurity and the criterion variables
into account, and weighted by sample size and degree of artifact correction
(Hunter & Schmidt, 1990; see e.g. Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topol-
nytsky, 2002; but see Sverke et al., 2002). A 95 per cent confidence interval
was constructed for the association between job insecurity and each criterion
variable to test if each of these associations was non-zero. The 75 per cent
rule and the credibility interval of each relationship were used to examine
the presence of moderators (Hunter & Schmidt, 1990; Whitener, 1990; see
e.g. Zhao & Seibert, 2006).
For the identification of moderators, we referred to the results of Hunter
and Schmidt’s (1990) subgroup analysis.8 According to Hunter and Schmidt,
the main criterion for the identification of moderators is whether the corrected
effect sizes of subgroups differ substantially (e.g. Judge & Ilies, 2002; Meyer
et al., 2002). Following Brown (1996), Mathieu and Zajac (1990), and
Sverke et al. (2002), we conducted a t-test for small samples (Winer, Brown,
& Michels, 1991) to test for the differences in corrected correlations across
subgroups. We also applied the Bonferroni method to control for Type I
errors.
It is a common practice to break down continuous variables into categories
to test moderating effects in subgroup analysis (Steel & Kammeyer-
Mueller, 2002). Following previous operationalisations of time frames of
organisational tenure (e.g. Gould & Hawkins, 1978; Mount, 1984) and age
(e.g. Gould, 1979; Rush, Peacock, & Milkovich, 1980), and previous
meta-analyses such as Cohen (1991, 1993) and Griffeth, Hom, and
Gaertner (2000), in our subgroup analysis samples with mean organisa-
tional tenure equal to or longer than 9 years were regarded as being of
8
The correlation between organisational tenure and age in our database was quite high
(r = .69, p < .001). However, we did not run a multiple weighted least square (WLS) regression
(Hedges & Olkin, 1985; Steel & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2002; Viswesvaran & Sanchez, 1998),
which takes multicollinearity into account, to examine the moderating effects of tenure, age,
and gender because there were only a handful of studies reporting all three pieces of informa-
tion about tenure, age, and gender composition. On the other hand, we ran a simple WLS
regression as a reference to subgroup analysis for the identification of moderators. Note that
subgroup analysis, which involves splitting studies into subgroups, may be less powerful to
detect continuous moderators than WLS regression (Steel & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2002). Sample
size and degree of artifact correction were used as the weight in the regression analysis. The
corrected effect sizes were regressed on tenure, age, and gender composition, respectively. The
Bonferroni adjustment was applied.
RESULTS
The estimated true (corrected) correlations, the confidence intervals, the
percentages of variance accounted for by artifacts, and the credibility
intervals are summarised in Table 1. Results showed that job insecurity was
negatively related to job satisfaction (rc = −.43), organisational commitment
(rc = −.35), work performance (rc = −.21), trust (rc = −.49), and job involvement
(rc = −.20), and was positively related to turnover intention (rc = .32). In
addition, job insecurity was negatively related to psychological health
(rc = −.28) and physical health (rc = −.23). That the confidence intervals
of these relationships excluded zero suggested that these associations were
significantly different from zero. The amount of variance of all these relation-
ships accounted for by artifacts was less than 75 per cent. Furthermore, the
credibility intervals of these relationships were large. These results suggested
that these relationships were subject to certain moderating effects.
9
The results of simple WLS regression were consistent with those of subgroup analysis for
tenure, age, and gender.
Psychology.
TABLE 1
The Relationship between Job Insecurity and its Consequences
CHENG AND CHAN
Job Satisfaction 76260 94 −.32 .01 −.35 −.30 −.43 .18 −.66 −.21 19.90
Organisational Commitment 38650 83 −.26 .02 −.30 −.23 −.35 .24 −.65 −.05 12.01
Turnover Intention 25669 49 .22 .01 .19 .25 .32 .14 .14 .50 32.87
Psychological Health 72339 77 −.20 .01 −.22 −.18 −.28 .12 −.43 −.12 22.92
Physical Health 56934 44 −.16 .01 −.18 −.13 −.23 .13 −.40 −.06 16.50
Work Performance 3752 15 −.16 .03 −.22 −.11 −.21 .13 −.37 −.05 35.63
Trust 4152 16 −.35 .02 −.40 −.31 −.49 .18 −.72 −.26 40.16
Job Involvement 3034 6 −.15 .03 −.21 −.09 −.20 .08 −.31 −.10 33.78
Note: N = sample size; k = number of sample; r = uncorrected mean correlation; SE = standard error of r; CI = confidence interval; rc = estimated true correlation; SD
= standard deviation of r; CV = credibility interval; % due to artifacts = percentage of variance accounted for by artifacts.
Note: Subgroup analysis was not run for the relationships between job insecurity and work performance,
trust, and job involvement because in these relationships there were fewer than three samples in at least one
of the subgroups. Shorter: Mean organisational tenure of the sample < 9; Longer: ≥ 9. ** p < .01 (after
Bonferroni adjustment).
TABLE 3
Subgroup Analysis of the Moderating Effect on the Relationship between Job
Insecurity and its Consequences: by Age
Note: Subgroup analysis was not run for the relationships between job insecurity and trust, and job
involvement because in these relationships there were fewer than three samples in at least one of the
subgroups. Younger: Mean age of the sample < 40; Older: > = 40. # p < .10 (after Bonferroni adjustment).
The relationship between job insecurity and turnover was more profound
among younger employees (rc = .36) than older employees (rc = .26). The
effect of job insecurity on psychological health was stronger among older
employees (rc = −.32) than younger employees (rc = −.24), and that on
physical health was also stronger among older employees (rc = −.30) than
TABLE 4
Subgroup Analysis of the Moderating Effect on the Relationship between Job
Insecurity and its Consequences: by Gender
Note: Male-only samples were compared with female-only samples. Subgroup analysis was not run for the
relationships between job insecurity and organisational commitment, turnover intention, work performance,
trust, and job involvement because in these relationships there were fewer than three samples in at least one
of the subgroups. The Bonferroni adjustment was applied.
DISCUSSION
The present meta-analytic study revealed a significant relationship between
job insecurity and its consequences. Results showed that job insecurity was
negatively related to job satisfaction, organisational commitment, psycho-
logical health, physical health, work performance, trust, and job involve-
ment, and was positively related to turnover intention. The estimates of the
main effects found in our study were generally comparable to those reported
in Sverke et al.’s (2002) study. One notable discrepancy between our results
and Sverke et al.’s results was that the estimate of the association between
job insecurity and work performance was found to be significant in our
study but not in Sverke et al.’s study. Another notable discrepancy was that
fails to account for stability and transient errors (Schmidt, Le, & Ilies,
2003). As a result, the population correlations would be underestimated.
Third, because the mean reliabilities used as substitutes were less variable
than the actual reliability values which were missing, the population
variance would be underestimated. Fourth, we could not correct for indirect
range restriction (Hunter, Schmidt, & Le, 2006; Schmidt, Oh, & Le,
2006). To the extent that the measures were subject to indirect range
restriction, population correlations would be underestimated and SDs
would be overestimated.
We did not run multiple regression analysis to investigate the unique
moderating effects of organisational tenure and age on the relationship
between job insecurity and its consequences. Because organisational tenure
is closely related to age, one may instead conclude from our results that
when facing job insecurity, older employees who typically have longer tenure
have a lower level of turnover intention and have more health problems
than younger employees (who typically have shorter tenure). Further primary
studies should examine the relative importance of the unique moderating
effects of tenure and age. This is important for clarifying the differential
effects of these two variables.
As discussed above, organisational tenure and age seem to capture differ-
ent meanings and influence the association between job insecurity and its
consequences through different processes. Organisational tenure reflects job
involvement and organisational commitment (Brown, 1996; Mathieu &
Zajac, 1990) while age captures occupational mobility and economic insecu-
rity (Kuhnert & Vance, 1992). However, the present study did not address
whether organisational commitment and job involvement really account for
the tenure difference in the relationship between job insecurity and its
consequences. It also did not reveal whether occupational mobility and
economic insecurity really account for the age difference in the relationship
between job insecurity and its consequences.
Future research should be conducted to examine if the moderating effect
of organisational tenure on the association between job insecurity and its
consequences is mediated by organisational commitment and job involve-
ment. For instance, the positive association between job insecurity and turn-
over intention may be more profound among employees with lower levels
of organisational commitment and job involvement. And the moderating
effect of organisational tenure may become negligible after organisational
commitment and job involvement have been controlled for. Similarly,
further studies should be conducted to examine if occupational mobility and
economic insecurity mediate the moderating effect of age on the impact of
job insecurity. For example, perceived occupational mobility and economic
insecurity may predict the negative association between job insecurity and
well-being that this association is more negative among employees with
Concluding Remarks
The present study confirms the negative impact of job insecurity on employees.
More importantly, it also reveals that different types of employees suffer
from and react to job insecurity in different ways. Under the threat of job
loss, younger employees and employees with shorter tenure tend to have a
stronger intention to leave their organisations. Older employees and
employees with longer tenure, on the other hand, are more affected in terms
of their physical and psychological health. Organisations should take differ-
ent measures to help their employees to deal with job insecurity. Otherwise,
both employees and organisations will suffer.
REFERENCES
*Denotes the studies included in the meta-analysis.
*Abramis, D.J. (1994). Relationship of job stressors to job performance: Linear or
an inverted-U? Psychological Reports, 75, 547–558.
*Albrecht, S., & Travaglione, A. (2003). Trust in public-sector senior management.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14, 76–92.
*Allen, T.D., Freeman, D.M., Russell, J.E.A., Reizenstein, R.C., & Rentz, J.O.
(2001). Survivor reactions to organizational downsizing: Does time erase the
pain? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 145–164.
*Alnajjar, A.A. (1996). Relationship between job satisfaction and organizational
commitment among employees in the United Arab Emirates. Psychological
Reports, 79, 315 –321.
*Anderson, B.W. (2003). Mergers and acquisitions: The impact of spirituality on
reducing merger syndrome. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64 (3-B), 1531.
(UMI No. 3083514)
*Anderson, M.B.G., & Iwanicki, E.F. (1984). Teacher motivation and its relation-
ship to burnout. Educational Administration Quarterly, 20, 109–132.
*Andolsek, D.M., & Stebe, J. (2004). Multinational perspectives on work values and
commitment. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 4, 181–209.
*Armstrong-Stassen, M. (1993). Production workers’ reactions to a plant closing:
The role of transfer, stress, and support. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping: An Inter-
national Journal, 6, 201–214.
*Armstrong-Stassen, M. (1994). Coping with transition: A study of layoff survivors.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 597– 621.
*Armstrong-Stassen, M. (2002). Designated redundant but escaping lay-off: A spe-
cial group of lay-off survivors. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psy-
chology, 75, 1–13.
*Armstrong-Stassen, M. (2004). The influence of prior commitment on the reactions
of layoff survivors to organizational downsizing. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 9, 46 – 60.
*Arnold, H.J., & Feldman, D.C. (1982). A multivariate analysis of the determinants
of job turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 350–360.
*Ashford, S.J., Lee, C., & Bobko, P. (1989). Content, causes and consequences of
job insecurity: A theory-based measure and substantive test. Academy of Manage-
ment Journal, 32, 803 – 829.
*Axelrod, W.L., & Gavin, J.F. (1980). Stress and strain in blue-collar and white-
collar management staff. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 17, 41–49.
*Barling, J., & Kelloway, E.K. (1996). Job insecurity and health: The moderating
role of workplace control. Stress Medicine, 12, 253–259.
*Barnett, R.C., & Brennan, R.T. (1995). The relationship between job experiences
and psychological distress: A structural equation approach. Journal of Organiza-
tional Behavior, 16, 259 –276.
*Batt, R. (2004). Who benefits from teams? Comparing workers, supervisors, and
managers. Industrial Relations, 43, 183 –212.
Bernard, J. (1981). The good provider role: Its rise and fall. American Psychologist,
36, 1–12.
*Chan, W., Kwok, K.-F., & Au Yeung, S.-M. (2004). Facing challenging circum-
stance: Optimism and job insecurity. Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies,
5, 81– 95.
*Chang, E. (2002). Distributive justice and organizational commitment revisited:
Moderation by layoff in the case of Korean employees. Human Resource Manage-
ment, 41, 261–270.
Chapman, D.S., Uggerslev, K.L., Carroll, S.A., Piasentin, K.A., & Jones, D.A.
(2005). Applicant attraction to organizations and job choice: A meta-analytic
review of the correlates of recruiting outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology,
90, 928 – 944.
*Cheng, Y., Chen, C.-W., Chen, C.-J., & Chiang, T.-L. (2005). Job insecurity and
its association with health among employees in the Taiwanese general popula-
tion. Social Science and Medicine, 61, 41–52.
*Chirumbolo, A., & Hellgren, J. (2003). Individual and organizational consequences
of job insecurity: A European study. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 24,
217–240.
Cohen, A. (1991). Career stage as a moderator of the relationships between organi-
zational commitment and its outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational
Psychology, 64, 253–268.
Cohen, A. (1993). Organizational commitment and turnover: A meta-analysis.
Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1140 –1157.
*Colarelli, S.M., Dean, R.A., & Konstans, C. (1987). Comparative effects of per-
sonal and situational influences on job outcomes of new professionals. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 72, 558 –566.
Conger, R.D., Lorenz, R.O., Edler, G.J., Simons, R.L., & Xiaojia, G.E. (1993).
Husband and wife differences in response to undesirable life events. Journal of
Health and Social Behavior, 34, 71– 88.
*Cordero, R., Farris, G.F., & DiTomaso, N. (1998). Technical professionals in
cross-functional teams: Their quality of work life. Journal of Production Innova-
tion Management, 15, 550 –563.
Crandall, R., & Perrewe, P.L. (Eds.) (1995). Occupational stress: A handbook.
Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.
*Cunningham, C.E., Woodward, C.A., Shannon, H.S., Maclntosh, J., Lendrum, B.,
Rosenbloom, D., & Brown, J. (2002). Readiness for organizational change: A
longitudinal study of workplace, psychological and behavioral correlates. Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 377–392.
*Davy, J.A., Kinicki, A.J., & Scheck, C.L. (1991). Developing and testing a model
of survivor responses to layoffs. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 38, 302–
317.
*Davy, J.A., Kinicki, A.J., & Scheck, C.L. (1997). A test of job insecurity’s direct
and mediated effects on withdrawal cognitions. Journal of Organizational Behav-
ior, 18, 323 –349.
*De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2006). The impact of job insecurity and contract
type on attitudes, well-being and behavioral reports: A psychological contract
perspective. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79, 395–
409.
*De Witte, H. (1999). Job insecurity and psychological well-being: Review of the
Kuhnert, K.W., & Palmer, D.R. (1991). Job security, health and the intrinsic and
extrinsic characteristics of work. Group and Organization Studies, 16, 178–192.
*Kuhnert, K.W., & Vance, R.J. (1992). Job insecurity and moderators of the rela-
tion between job insecurity and employee adjustment. In J.C. Quick, L.R. Murphy,
& J.J. Hurrell, Jr. (Eds.), Stress and well being at work: Assessments and inter-
ventions for occupational mental health (pp. 48– 63). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
*Landsbergis, P.A. (1988). Occupational stress among health care workers: A test of
the job demands-control model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9, 217–239.
*Lee, C., Bobko, P., & Chen, Z.X. (2006). Investigation of the multidimensional
model of job insecurity in China and the USA. Applied Psychology: An Inter-
national Review, 55, 512–540.
*Levanoni, E., & Sales, C.A. (1990). Differences in job attitudes between full-time
and part-time Canadian employees. Journal of Social Psychology, 130, 231–237.
Lim, V.K.G. (1996). Job insecurity and its outcomes: Moderating effects of work-
based and nonwork-based social support. Human Relations, 49, 171–194.
*Lim, V.K.G. (1997). Moderating effects of work-based support on the relationship
between job insecurity and its consequences. Work and Stress, 11, 251–266.
*Lim, V.K.G., & Teo, T.S.H. (2000). To work or not to work at home: An empirical
investigation of factors affecting attitudes towards teleworking. Journal of Man-
agerial Psychology, 15, 560 –582.
*Lindstrom, K., Leino, T., Seitsamo, J., & Torstila, I. (1997). A longitudinal study
of work characteristics and health complaints among insurance employees in
VDT work. International Journal of Human –Computer Interaction, 9, 343–368.
*Lord, A., & Hartley, J. (1998). Organizational commitment and job insecurity in a
changing public service organization. European Journal of Work and Organiza-
tional Psychology, 7, 341–354.
*Lu, C.-C. (2003). Organizational downsizing, high commitment human resource
practices, and the attitudes of army officers. Dissertation Abstracts International,
63 (12-A), 4384. (UMI No. 3075878)
*McAulay, B.J. (2000). Work commitment in a turbulent career environment: Job
insecurity’s effect on psychological attachment to organization and profession.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 60 (7-A), 2695. (UMI No. 9938686)
*McDonough, P. (2000). Job insecurity and health. International Journal of Health
Services, 30, 453 – 476.
*Mak, A.S., & Mueller, J. (2000). Job insecurity, coping resources and personality
dispositions in occupational strain. Work and Stress, 14, 312–328.
*Makikangas, A., & Kinnunen, U. (2003). Psychosocial work stressors and well-
being: Self-esteem and optimism as moderators in a one-year longitudinal sample.
Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 537–557.
Martinussen, M., & Bjornstad, J.F. (1999). Meta-analysis calculations based on
independent and nonindependent cases. Educational and Psychological Measure-
ment, 59, 928 –950.
Mathieu, J.E., & Zajac, D.M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents,
correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulle-
tin, 108, 171–194.
*Mauno, S., Kinnunen, U., Makikangas, A., & Natti, J. (2005). Psychological
Job Security Satisfaction Scale: A classical test theory and IRT approach. Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 451–467.
*Probst, T.M., & Lawler, J. (2006). Cultural values as moderators of employee
reactions to job insecurity: The role of individualism and collectivism. Applied
Psychology: An International Review, 55, 234 –254.
Quick, C.J., & Tetrick, L.E. (Eds.) (2003). Handbook of occupational health psycho-
logy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Ramlall, S. (2003). Managing employee retention as strategy for increasing organi-
zational competitiveness. Applied Human Resource Management Research, 8, 63–
72.
*Reilly, A.H., Brett, J.M., & Stroh, L.K. (1993). The impact of corporate turbulence
on managers’ attitudes. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 167–179.
*Reisel, W.D., & Banai, M. (2002). Comparison of a multidimensional and a global
measure of job insecurity: Predicting job attitudes and work behaviors. Psycho-
logical Reports, 90, 913 –922.
*Reitman, F., & Schneer, J.A. (2003). The promised path: A longitudinal study of
managerial careers. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18, 60–75.
Riketta, M. (2002). Attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance: A
meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 257–266.
*Robblee, M.A. (1998). Confronting the threat of organizational downsizing: Cop-
ing and health. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59 (6-B), 3072. (UMI No.
NQ26865)
*Robinson, S.L. (1996). Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Administra-
tive Science Quarterly, 41, 574 –599.
Rosenblatt, Z., Talmud, I., & Ruvio, A. (1999). A gender-based framework of the
experience of job insecurity and its effects on work attitudes. European Journal
of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 197 –217.
*Roskies, E., Louis-Guerin, C., & Fournier, C. (1993). Coping with job insecurity:
How does personality make a difference? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14,
617– 630.
Roznowski, M., & Hulin, C.L. (1992). The scientific merit of valid measures of
general constructs with special reference to job satisfaction and job withdrawal.
In C.J. Cranny, P.C. Smith, & E.F. Stone (Eds.), Job satisfaction: How people
feel about their jobs and how it affects their performance (pp. 123–163). New
York: Lexington Books.
Rush, J.C., Peacock, A.C., & Milkovich, G.T. (1980). Career stages: A partial test
of Levinson’s model of life/ career stages. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 16,
347–359.
Sagie, A., Birati, A., & Tziner, A. (2002). Assessing the costs of behavioral and
psychological withdrawal: A new model and an empirical illustration. Applied
Psychology: An International Review, 51, 67– 89.
*Schaubroeck, J., Ganster, D.C., & Kemmerer, B. (1996). Does trait affect promote
job attitude stability? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 191–196.
Schmidt, F.L., Le, H., & Ilies, R. (2003). Beyond alpha: An empirical examination
of the effects of different sources of measurement error on reliability estimates
for measures of individual differences constructs. Psychological Methods, 8, 206–
224.
Sverke, M., & Hellgren, J. (2002). The nature of job insecurity: Understanding
employment uncertainty on the brink of a new millennium. Applied Psychology:
An International Review, 51, 23 – 42.
Sverke, M., Hellgren, J., & Naswall, K. (2002). No security: A meta-analysis and
review of job insecurity and its consequences. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 7, 242–264.
*Tang, T.L.-P., Singer, M.G., & Roberts, S. (2000). Employees’ perceived organiza-
tional instrumentality: An examination of the gender differences. Journal of Man-
agerial Psychology, 15, 378 – 406.
*Tiegs, R.B., Tetrick, L.E., & Fried, Y. (1992). Growth need strength and context
satisfactions as moderators of the relations of the job characteristics model.
Journal of Management, 18, 575 –593.
*Tivendell, J., & Bourbonnais, C. (2000). Job insecurity in a sample of Canadian
civil servants as a function of personality and perceived job characteristics.
Psychological Reports, 87, 55 – 60.
*Unckless, A.L. (1999). Survivor reactions to organizational downsizing: An appli-
cation of threat rigidity theory. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60 (1-B),
0401. (UMI No. 9915970)
United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (2001). Mass layoffs statistics. Washington,
DC.
United States Census Bureau (2004). Historical income tables: Families. Retrieved
3 December 2005, from http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/f22.html
*van der Doef, M., & Maes, S. (1999). The Leiden Quality of Work Questionnaire:
Its construction, factor structure, and psychometric qualities. Psychological
Reports, 85, 954 –962.
*van Vegchel, N., de Jonge, J., Bakker, A.B., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2002). Testing
global and specific indicators of rewards in the Effort–Reward Imbalance Model:
Does it make any difference? European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 11, 403 – 421.
*van Vuuren, C.V., & Klandermans, P.G. (1990). Individual reactions to job in-
security: An integrated model. In P.J.D. Drenth & J.A. Sergeant (Eds.), European
perspectives in psychology ( pp. 133 –146). Chichester, England: Wiley.
*Vinnicombe, S. (1984). Communications and job satisfaction: A case study of an
airline’s cabin crew members. Leadership and Organization Development Journal,
5, 2 –7.
*Vinokur-Kaplan, D., Jayaratne, S., & Chess, W.A. (1994). Job satisfaction and
retention of social workers in public agencies, non-profit agencies and private
practice: The impact of workplace conditions and motivators. Administration in
Social Work, 18, 93 –121.
Viswesvaran, C., & Sanchez, J.I. (1998). Moderator search in meta-analysis: A
review and cautionary note on existing approaches. Educational and Psychologi-
cal Measurement, 58, 77 – 87.
Whitener, E.M. (1990). Confusion of confidence intervals and credibility intervals in
meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 315–321.
*Wiesenfeld, B.M., Brockner, J., Petzall, B., Wolf, R., & Bailey, J. (2001). Stress and
coping among layoff survivors: A self-affirmation analysis. Anxiety, Stress and
Coping: An International Journal, 14, 15 –34.