Examines job stressors effects on workplace bullying and work outcomes, indicating harmful configurations.
Purpose Work-related stress is a major concern for employee health and organisational functioning. While job demands are often linked to strain, some may also foster growth and development. Understanding when and under what conditions job stressors contribute to harm is therefore critical. This study examines nonlinear associations between challenge and hindrance stressors and key work outcomes within the challenge–hindrance stressor framework (CHSF), with particular focus on workplace bullying as a severe outcome of adverse working conditions. Design/methodology/approach Data were drawn from a prospective national probability sample of Swedish employees (N = 2,024). Linear, quadratic and moderation analyses were used to examine associations between job stressors at baseline and subsequent workplace bullying, job satisfaction, psychological distress, and turnover intention. Findings Challenge stressors showed curvilinear associations with all outcomes, with the most favourable outcomes at moderate levels. Hindrance stressors displayed mainly linear associations with poorer outcomes. Hindrance stressors also moderated the nonlinear effect of challenge stressors on workplace bullying, such that both low and high challenge levels were associated with greater bullying exposure when hindrance stressors were high. Practical implications The findings highlight the importance of assessing combinations of job stressors in workplace health management, as certain configurations may signal increased risk of bullying and other adverse outcomes. Originality/value This study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the CHSF by integrating nonlinearity and stressor interactions, and advances the work environment hypothesis by demonstrating how combinations of job stressors influence the risk of workplace bullying.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Michael Rosander (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: