DISCUSSION ON

ARTICLES

Presented to
Dr. Zafar Ahmad
Presented by
Aqdas Nasir
COVID-19-RELATED MENTAL
HEALTH EFFECTS IN THE
WORKPLACE: A NARRATIVE
REVIEW

Written by: Giorgi et al., 2020

Journal: International journal of
environmental research and public
health
INTRODUCTION
 The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
pandemic has deeply altered social and working
environments in several ways.
 Social distancing policies

 mandatory lockdowns

 isolation periods

 anxiety of getting sick

 loss of income

 fear of the futur

All jointly influence the mental health of citizens and

workers.
CONT.…..
 Not only undermine the physical health but also
individuals’ psychological resources and resilience.
 A lot of people committed suicide and millions of people
lost their jobs.
 The press release of the International Labor Organization
(ILO) on 18 March 2020, reported a drop of 24.7 million
jobs as the worst-case scenario and 5.3 million as the
best scenario.
 In the worst-case scenario, the world unemployment rate
would rise from 4.936% to 5.644%, along with an
increase in suicides of around 9570 per year.
AIM OF NARRATIVE REVIEW
 To describe and acknowledge how psychological
aspects resulting from the outbreak of the
COVID-19 epidemic could be linked to various
workplace and organizational factors,
 To help researchers and stakeholders to entail
targeted strategies aimed at managing
psychological health outcomes related to the
occupational scenario.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
 COVID-19 is a communicable disease, factors related to
the risk of contagion in the workplace and the adoption
of preventive procedures can cause several mental
concerns.
For example:
 the lack personal protective equipment (PPE)

 the physical weight caused by wearing them

 the fear of being infected and that this could harm

family members
 the conflict between safety procedures

 longer working hours

CONT.….
 In response, workers may develop a range of
behavioral, physical and psychological reactions.
 The healthcare sector is subjected to an
excessive strain that adversely affects working
life.
METHODOLOGY
 The literature search was performed during July
2020 using Google scholar, PubMed, and Scopus.
 Total 183 articles were included.

 Several search terms belonging to each PICO

section were included such as:
1. Population: workers, employees;
2. Intervention: workplace, organization, job, job task,
occupation.
3. Comparison: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, 2019-nCoV,
coronavirus, epidemic, pandemic;
4. Outcome: mental health, mental illness, psychological
health, stigma, psychological disorders, stress, post-
traumatic stress disorder, depression, suicide.
RESULTS
 The included studies found job task as a risk
factors for the onset of mental related issues.
 In particular, the majority of the studies
considered healthcare workers and frontline
workers as a work group at higher risk of
developing several psychological outcomes such
as depression, anxiety, stress, sleep
disturbance and so on.
RESULTS
 The covid-19 epidemic brings high levels of
 psychological distress
 insomnia
 alcohol
 drug misuse
 and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
 higher perceived stress primarily on younger people
 medical staff
 all healthcare and emergency workers
DISCUSSION
 The results of the qualitative analysis enlighten
underlying reasons, such as fear of COVID-19
infection, financial crisis, loneliness, social boycott,
pressure for quarantine, fear of positive COVID-19,
and pre- and post- lockdown work-related stress.
In addition, psychological help has been considered very
useful although administered via social media.
 Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT)

 motivational interviewing (MI)

 Crisis intervention
CONT.…
 Reducing working time
 enhancing smart working
 promoting secure protocols
 trainings, and improving job/leadership
support seems to be related to better
performance and well-being
 Security and safety equipment are highly
and positively related to workers well-
being and performance
DISCUSSION
 Some studies considered the impact of
COVID-19 pandemic on mental health
outcomes in vulnerable working populations.
 The most vulnerable workers categories
seems to be the
 front-line workers

 health care workers

 migrants
 young adult workers.
CONCLUSION
 In this scenario, promoting the development of reliable
preventive approaches is essential.
 For example,

 The use of coaching psychology can be considered a

valid strategy to lower burnout levels and create a safe
environment in which individuals can feel free to
discuss their professional development and understand
how to improve their resources to overcome obstacles,
such as the new challenges caused by the COVD-19
pandemic.
STAYING IN TOUCH, YET EXPECTED
TO BE? A DIARY STUDY ON THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
PERSONAL SMARTPHONE
USE AT WORK AND WORK–
NONWORK INTERACTION

Written by: (Paterrer et al., 2021)

Journal: Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology
INTRODUCTION
 The present study challenges the prevalent
negative view of personal smartphone use at work.
 Personal smartphone use at work is instrumental
in connecting different life domains (Wan,
Shaffer, Lau, & Cheung, 2019).
 Process of interaction between a person’s work
and nonwork domain is known as work–nonwork
interaction (WNI).
 It may be positive or negative regarding how one’s
functioning in both domains is perceived (Geurts
& Demerouti, 2004; Geurts et al., 2005).
CONT...
Personal smartphone use at work may
hamper an employee’s functioning in
the work domain, thereby resulting in
negative WNI.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

 From the perspective of work–family border theory

(border theory hereinafter; Clark, 2000), smartphones
allow for physical, temporal and psychological infusions
of one domain to the other.
 Creates situations in which employees remain accessible
to positive and negative experiences from the nonwork
domain while being physically present in the work
domain (Rice, 2017).
 Managing the demands of work and nonwork is deemed
a major challenge that employees face today (Ollier-
Malaterre, Rothbard, & Berg, 2013).
METHODOLOGY
 Participants were recruited through a convenience
sampling approach and comprised family members,
friends and acquaintances of the authors, as well as their
students.
 Eligible participants were working individuals with
fairly traditional work schedules (i.e. work times
between around 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on workdays from
Monday to Friday).
 Further requirements for participation were that
employees worked at least 20 hr per week and were
allowed to use their personal smartphones for private
purposes during working hours.
CONT.…
 The final sample of the study comprises
127 employees, of whom each provided
data on at least two working days; seven
people were excluded as they did not
fulfill this requirement.
 They completed online questionnaires
three times a day over ten working days,
resulting in a total of 1,066 days of data.
RESULTS
 Multilevel structural equation modeling
indicated that on the day-level of analysis,
personal smartphone use at work promoted:
1. Through the perceived social benefits of
communication Positive work-nonwork
interaction get promoted.
2. Perceived social costs of communication, cause
Increased negative Work-nonwork interaction
PRACTICAL IMPLICATION
 Findings suggest that personal smartphone use at work is
not per se beneficial or harmful in regards to the work–
nonwork interface.
 Thus, rather than pushing a general policy that prohibits
the use of personal smartphones at the workplace,
organizations would be well-advised to embrace a more
differentiated approach.
 Permitting autonomy to employees in the handling of
their personal smartphones can create a committed
workforce and, in turn, influence workplace loyalty and
job performance (Coker, 2011).
LIMITATIONS
 First, participants provided self-reported
measures that are prone to common method bias
(Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Podsakoff, 2012).
 Second, using time self-estimates for personal
smartphone use at work raises the question of
whether people tend to over- or underestimate
the time spent on their smartphones (Andrews
et al., 2015).
THANKYOU