PEER REVIEW

Please help with assignment 

PEER REVIEW ASSIGNMENT

Peer reviewing is an important process in psychological science. As researchers, we conduct studies and write up our results, and in order to publish our results, we submit them to peer-reviewed journals. Typically three of our peers, others who are familiar with the specific subfield we study, will review our manuscripts submitted for publication. An editor of the journal will receive the manuscripts, ensure anonymity, and select the reviewers. Then the editor collects the reviews and returns them to the authors of the manuscripts, also ensuring the anonymity of the reviewers.

Your grade on this activity is derived from your reviews of others’ work, not the reviews others provide of your work. You will be assigned a manuscript for review. You must review it and return your reviews on time to qualify for ANY points. If you are late, you will receive NO points, and your colleagues will not have the benefit of your comments, which they will need to improve their paper for the final submission. I hope you will take your responsibility seriously and give it the attention it deserves.

On Monday of Module 7, you will exchange papers with another student in class and look over his/her work. Be sure to get a copy of it to read if you are unable to complete your review during class time. By Wednesday of Module 7 you must submit your reviews in the appropriate Peer-review dropbox, and your reviews must follow the assignment format (see below), using this document.

Assignment Format

Your reviews will be done in memo format (not in APA style!). Keep in mind that your review is constructive feedback for your colleague. Your goal is to help them make it better for the final paper.

Begin with a paragraph that summarizes what they have accomplished with the paper. This is a paragraph that should let the editor know that you have read the paper and understood the goal of the writer.

Your second paragraph should focus on the strengths of the paper, in other words, what you feel the author did well.

Your third paragraph should focus on the weaknesses of the paper, particularly in areas where the author could improve the work to make it more readable, understandable, and informative.

Unlike your manuscript, your review should be SINGLE-spaced. Your review will probably be .5 to 1 page long, but feel free to comment more if it is warranted.

Naming the review files after the author’s last name will be helpful to the editor, (namely me). E. G., file name: peer-review_Ault

Format of your review

TO: Editor

FROM: Reviewer ________ (your name)

RE: Manuscript entitled “__________” [Use the manuscript title and author’s last name]

Begin your review here. Refer to the writer of the manuscript as “the author.” Be as clear and direct as possible. See rubric at the end for grading.

2

Stress and Behavioral Factors That Inhibit Work and Home Satisfaction

Isilena Lebron

Research Methods I PSY-530-MPOL1

Dr. Goldstien

11/27/22

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to explore stress and behavioral factors that impact work and life satisfaction among employees from diverse workforces. In this study, the goal is to identify stressors or behavioral factors through a survey to help find an intervention that can increase work-life satisfaction and job performance. The results help employers know which factors prevent employees from achieving home satisfaction in activities outside of work so that they improve work and life satisfaction for their employees. This also helps employees find a balance so they can do a better job at work and complete satisfying tasks at home. 

Stress and Behavioral Factors That Inhibit Work and Home Satisfaction

For many employees, it can be tough to maintain a healthy balance between their work life and home life. The easiest way to discover a common factor that most employees may face is by conducting a quick survey about their difficulties at both locations. To create a work-life balance, interventions can be offered at home and work based on responses from the participants in the surveys. It is possible that the interventions could improve the quality of life of employees by decreasing factors that could inhibit their productivity at work and home. Employees’ motivation to achieve their goals in maintaining a work-life balance can improve by having employers assist the employees in their journey to reduce their factors (Haider et al., 2018). There would be a variation in the interventions based on the results of the survey and the behaviors that inhibit employees at home and work.

Many firms are making substantial efforts to reduce friction between their workers’ work and family responsibilities, in response to the growing health and productivity issues caused by employees’ lack of work-life balance (Haider et al., 2018). Strengthening the link between work-life balance and job performance through research is essential to ensure employees’ psychological well-being and satisfaction. Work-life balance and performance being linked enhances the individual’s satisfaction in both locations and promotes their psychological well-being (Haider et al., 2018). While each job and employee’s life outside of work is unique, many employees face common factors that prevent them from reaching their full potential. This also helps employers create strength in their relationships with employees by providing these surveys to help them succeed. In the survey, the variables being evaluated are stressors and behavioral factors, an indication of what inhibits an employee’s satisfaction at work and home lifestyle. It gives the employees a sense of importance, which increases their motivation at work to be successful, which helps the company have higher satisfaction from employees with peak performance (Giessner et al., 2022).

Literature Review

Researchers have looked into the relationship between work-life balance and job satisfaction through multiple studies. There are several results among different studies, but a common result for each study is to provide this balance for employees, therefore employers can benefit from the highest performance of their work team. Through three different research articles, the main objective is to provide positive psychological well-being and a positive lifestyle for employees at home and work. However, researchers used different variables and methods for every research study conducted.

For employees to live a positive lifestyle and gain valuable satisfaction at work, they need to find a work-life balance. Depending on the job and lifestyle of each person, there are various ways to achieve a balance between both locations. Haun and his colleagues (2018) found that practicing mindfulness by writing in journals in the evening or before bed could help a person with detaching from work to increase effectiveness at home (Haun et al., 2018). For five days, 65 participants wrote in their journals after work and before going to sleep recording how mindfulness affected their day. The stress detachment model was used as a buffer between work and home locations, with information written down in the journals about how they felt during those days of practicing mindfulness. This study assessed behavioral demands and psychological attachments to differentiate tensions at work and home with mindfulness practices. Across the two locations, participants’ households and workplaces were found to benefit from a mindful mindset (Haun et al., 2018).

Furthermore, Haun et al. (2018) is a great starting point to develop new research studies for work-in-life satisfaction, with a favorable result of exercising mindfulness to buffer stressors (Haun et al., 2018). Producing a work environment where workers are more efficient and feel more satisfied is essential for the work environment to have the productivity of work increase (Haider et al., 2018). Employees being consciously aware of the task that they are doing, both at work and home, increases their productivity to be able to complete the task more efficiently without deviating away from the task the employee wants to complete in either location.

The researchers Lal & Dakshinamoorthy (2021) found that employees with higher work incentives are more likely to be satisfied with their lives, similar to the findings of Haun et al. (2018). Although the study varies in the type of employees observed, the data collected helps compare different workers and variables to achieve a positive result for employees’ work-life balance and satisfaction. Lal & Dakshinamoorthy’s research differs in the group that is being surveyed, focusing on specific demographics of only female workers from the business named Synergy in Chennai City. The research examines the effects on work, advancements in task fulfillment, and the ability to add concrete improvement of incentives in the work environment (Lal & Dakshinamoorthy, 2021).

Lal & Dakshinamoorthy used two different questionnaires to gather the information they needed. The methods for gathering the data from the primary and secondary questionnaire is quite simple to follow (Lal & Dakshinamoorthy, 2021). The sources were evaluated using two separate data sets: the primary data set was a working female questionnaire, and the secondary data set was a collection of varied literature (books, profiles, articles, etc.) created by a range of professors. Understanding the meaning of work-life stabilizes a worker in their life and beyond work assistance to acquire the info the researchers seek in the objective of the study. Work-life stability is not simply household activities, but includes sporting activities, volunteering, going out in the evening, etc. The survey from this study allowed employers to learn that creating a supportive environment and offering more work-from-home opportunities would increase the productivity of their employees. (Lal & Dakshinamoorthy, 2021).

Stressors and life activities can interfere with work and home for employees with anxious and avoidant attachment styles. Stressors can also interfere with the job domain by looking at domain facilitation, interference, and job satisfaction. Chong and his colleagues (2018) found that the interactive impact of domain facilitation and work-home interference related to task completion has a negative relationship with each other (Chong et al., 2018). The dependent variables acting as mediators are the two attachment styles of avoidant and anxious employees with four items acting as the individual control groups. Homework interference, work-home interference, home-work facilitation, and work-home facilitation are cross-sections for each attachment style. Work-home facilitation refers to employees creating an office and establishing a place to work within their home, while home-work facilitation refers to employees going to work in a business domain (Chong et al., 2018). Work-home interference and home-work interference refer to the challenges employees face in either work-home facilitation or home-work facilitation (Chong et al., 2018).

The researchers recruited the participants (
n = 159) through Amazon by focusing on their three categories: domain facilitation, interference, and job satisfaction (Chong et al., 2018). The recruitment criteria only allow participants over 18 who work less than 35 hours, live in one of the 50 states, and/or have a significant other. The participants in the study had to complete an exit session once the study is over and report over the course of ten nights in a row. Four factors—homework interference, work-home interference, work-home facilitation, and home-work facilitation—were evaluated in the report. Additionally, domain facilitation and interference are most likely to relate to task completion in various ways based on private distinctions (Chong et al., 2018).

According to the findings, factors such as homework interference, and facilitation do not affect whatsoever the amount of work of completion. However, depending on the various job organizations, work-home interference, and facilitation lead to improvement in task completion. This improvement is shown with each task (Chong et al., 2018). The attachment styles that are potential mediators have to do with improving work-home facilitation and getting tasks done. When one has an anxious attachment style, home-work interference leads to less task completion, whereas work-home facilitation increases task completion. The avoidant attachment style demonstrates that there is not a strong connection between an individual’s home-work life and a sense of contentment in their employment (Chong et al., 2018). This was demonstrated by the fact that there was no link between the two.

Proposal Method

Participants

The participants will be between the ages of 24 and 60, and they will work for

Saint Leo University

to participate in a study on finding work-life balance and job satisfaction. The participants for the study will be different staff members throughout the university departments, which could vary if they work online or on campus. The school’s administrator will be able to notify staff members if they can participate in various departments at Saint Leo University. Participation in this study is completely voluntary, and participants are free to leave at any time. There is no incentive for this study except potentially finding an intervention to improve work-life balance and job satisfaction. The desired sample is to have 30 participants from five different departments of the university, making a total of 150. Discretion will be used for those who choose to participate in the study.

Materials and procedure

If the administrator of the university allows for a notification to be sent to staff members inviting them to participate in the study, it will be sent out in the form of an e-mail for communication (Appendix A). Attached will be a link to Qualtrics and informed consent for this study (

Appendix B

). If the participant chooses to agree with the informed consent, it will prompt them to the survey (

Appendix C

), where they will fill out basic information from two different questionnaires that are measuring work satisfaction and indicators that might inhibit the employee from being able to accomplish tasks both at home and at work.

The study will take place first online, and the staff members will have two weeks to complete it if they are interested in participating. From the results of the surveys, an intervention will be designed for participants to help reduce stress or behavioral factors that inhibit work-life balance and job satisfaction. A confirmation e-mail will be sent to the participants to obtain how they would like to receive the material to complete the intervention section of the study. The participants will write down how they feel about the intervention and improvements that could be made over two weeks. The participants in the journals will write down on a scale of 1 to 5 whether it is improving their work-life balance and job satisfaction as well. The journal will be filled out after work for two weeks consecutively, and the material will be provided by the researcher with everything the participant needs to complete the intervention successfully. At the end of the study, the researcher will talk to the participants about any disclosures, and a debriefing will be done. If a participant decides not to complete the study, they have the option to withdraw at any time.

The information collected is going to be quantitative to provide statistical data on the effect of work-life balance and job satisfaction from self-reported ratings on a Likert scale (1-strongly disagree–5-strongly agree) (Kerman et al., 2021). The measure will be used to collect statistical data to prove if there is a correlation between work-life balance and job satisfaction based on the factors that can inhibit an employee. Having self-reported ratings from the participants allows them to be honest and complete them after work in the evening.

Results

The results will include a statistical analysis of the data with the independent variables, descriptive analyses, and mixed ANOVA to be able to interpret the result of the study. Using a mixed design across the five different departments in a university to test the hypotheses is the most efficient way to be able to obtain reliable results for the study. Doing a cross-section of the different departments would be intriguing when obtaining results as well (Aryee et al., 2005). The university’s 30 employees from five different departments will create a sample size of 150 participants. The control group will consist of random individuals picked throughout each department to not have the intervention yet still take the pre and post-test.

Figure 1: Comparison Results Pre and Post-test from Baseline Survey

The purpose of conducting a mixed ANOVA is to interpret results from different departments in figuring out your relationship with the pre and post-survey of the stress and behavioral factors that inhibit an employee. The hypothesis is that the pre-test will have a higher indicator of a factor that inhibits an employee (
M=,
SD=). The post-test will potentially have a positive impact after the intervention has been placed to increase the work-life balance and job satisfaction (
M=,
SD=). The results of the F-test will indicate if there is a significant or not significant statistical difference between the pre and post-test of the survey after the intervention is applied (
F(
df)=
f,
p=,
d=).

Figure 2: Intervention Analysis of Improvement

One of the university’s departments will serve as the control group for the intervention, not receiving any treatment but keeping a journal for ten nights straight like the other participants (
M=,
SD=). This department won’t be aware that there is a control group (
M=,
SD=); instead, they will be tricked, and at the end of the study, they will be given a debriefing. Having the control group in the intervention allows for the comparison of data anonymously without bias among the researchers.

Discussion

The purpose of this study is to interpret stress and behavioral factors that inhibit work, life, balance, and job satisfaction among employees in various work corporations. It is hypothesized that by having a baseline survey to obtain the stress or behavioral factors that inhibit the employee an intervention can then be set forward to help reduce these factors from decreasing work-life, balance, and job satisfaction (Aryee et al., 2005). While the intervention may not guarantee an increase in work, life balance, and job satisfaction it could help predict other factors that need to be worked on in the workplace and at home (Cho et al., 2022). This study is to draw a connection from both locations to help increase the satisfaction of an employee working not just in one location, but in different working fields. The goal of this study is to be able to replicate the survey and provide different interventions amongst various working fields to provide improving results.

The possible outcome of this research is to find the factor that inhibits an employee from being successful. Having these results allows employers to know what to work on what their employees to create a work-life balance and job satisfaction. By potentially achieving this the employers might even commit effort to the organization taking responsibility in making their priority for the employee’s well-being (Im, 2022).

Limitations
to the study could be potentially not meeting the amount necessary from the sample size. Committing employees to both a baseline survey, and then a two-week trial of intervention could be time-consuming, and many participants may not want to commit or be honest with their answers based on what is being asked of them. Another possibility is not having the amount necessary for each department of the University to create diversity. Having diversity amongst the five different departments, allows diversity to be generalized among different companies with different tasks. Additionally but asking the participants to be very honest about their results is crucial to collecting data because it is self-reported. With participants not being honest then it could inhibit the results of the study or even the intervention and cause nonstatistical significance.

Regardless of the data, it can show employees how the work-life balance and job satisfaction can benefit them in their corporation by showing support to the employee. It can also create long time organizational commitment from employees and employers having these types of interventions done to create a more satisfying work-life balance and job satisfaction (Giessner et al., 2022). Although it can result differently and not benefit the employers or employees it’s still will show who is willing to commit to something whether it’s after work hours to benefit them and fellow employees.

Gaining a deeper understanding of higher management with their staff creates room for anything that is unsatisfactory to be able to be fixed to increase the work-life balance for the employee and job satisfaction (Wright et al., 2007). it is important and beneficial to keep in mind that employers talk to employees as normal people and not treat them in any way that is not respectful. A lot of problems with organizational commitment are employees do not feel valued and are overworked (Talukder, 2019). Having a research study that gains data on how supervisors feel about their depth inhale employers can be more beneficial with job satisfaction and employ another research study can be done to gain more insight on how the employer benefits them. Having information employees can create this study as a follow-up to fix any factors that inhibit the employee and supervisor.

Conclusion

Multiple factors can inhibit work and home satisfaction, which can be common in different work environments. There would certainly be a variation in the interventions based on the outcomes of the study and on the habits that hinder employees. By reducing elements that can hinder employees’ productivity at work and at home, the treatments may enhance their quality of life. Using different methods to collect the information and concluding that there are two common factors that inhibit work-in-home satisfaction among vast populations, it is important to create solutions to improve employee satisfaction, both at work and at home. In improvements for employees to have this satisfaction, their work efforts increase, and job satisfaction is met. This also helps employers gain more productivity through employees and maintain healthy relationships throughout the company to maintain psychological well-being for work-life balance and job performance (Talukder, 2019).

By using a survey to ask employees about the challenges they face at work and at home, it is predicted that researchers can determine what stressors or behavioral factors retain employees from having work-life and job satisfaction. The responses given in the survey can be used to conduct interventions that might be offered at both the workplace, and at home to help achieve a better work-life balance. The variables being analyzed in the survey include stressors and behavioral factors, both of which can be used to understand what may be causing an employee to feel discontent at work, in their family life, and with their job in general. The interventions implemented could improve the quality of life of employees by reducing stress and behavioral factors that could increase productivity at work and at home. 

References

Aryee, S., Srinivas, E. S., & Tan, H. H. (2005). Rhythms of Life: Antecedents and Outcomes of Work-Family Balance in Employed Parents.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(1), 132–146. https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.132

Cho, E., Chen, T.-Y., Cheng, G. H.-L., & Ho, M.-H. R. (2022). Work-family balance self-efficacy and work-family balance during the pandemic: A longitudinal study of working informal caregivers of older adults.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 27(3), 349–358.

https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1037/ocp0000321

Chong, A., Gordo, M., & Gere, J. (2018). The influences of work and home interference and facilitation on job satisfaction: An attachment theory perspective
. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 17(2), 94–101. Retrieved from

https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000202

(Supplemental)

Giessner, S. R., Dawson, J. F., Horton, K. E., & West, M. (2022). The impact of supportive leadership on employee outcomes during organizational mergers: An organizational-level field study
. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1037/apl0001042.supp (Supplemental)

Haider, S., Jabeen, S., & Ahmad, J. (2018). Moderated mediation between work-life balance and employee job performance: The role of psychological wellbeing and satisfaction with coworkers. 
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 34(1), 29–37. Retrieved from 

https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.5093/jwop2018a4

.

Haun, V. C., Nübold, A., & Bauer, A. G. (2018). Being mindful at work and home: Buffering effects in the stressor–detachment model.
Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 91(2), 385–410. Retrieved from

https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/joop.12200

.

Im, H. (2022). Come work with us: Inclusivity, performance, engagement, and job satisfaction as correlates of employer recommendation.
Journal of Personnel Psychology, 21(4), 208–214. https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000305 (Supplemental)

Kerman, K., Tement, S., & Korunka, C. (2021). Don’t leave your heart at work: Profiles of work–life interference and cardiometabolic risk.
International Journal of Stress Management, 28(2), 105–116. https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1037/str0000224

Lal, A. K., & Dakshinamoorthy, V. (2021). A Study on Work-Life Synergy among Women Employees in Chennai City
.
Ilkogretim Online, 20(4), 1493–1501. Retrieved from

https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2021.04.172

.  

Talukder, A. K. M. M. H. (2019). Supervisor support and organizational commitment: The role of work–family conflict, job satisfaction, and work–life balance
. Journal of Employment Counseling, 56(3), 98–116.

https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1002/joec.12125

Wright, T. A., Cropanzano, R., & Bonett, D. G. (2007). The moderating role of employee positive well being on the relation between job satisfaction and job performance.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12(2), 93–104. https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1037/1076-8998.12.2.93

Appendix A

Dear faculty staff members,

Are you interested in participating any study that could change your work-life balance and improve your job satisfaction?

We’ll look no further, Isilena Lebron is doing a research project by collecting information in a basic survey that inhibits employees with either stress or behavioral factors and is looking for an intervention to increase satisfaction both at home and at work.

Participation for staff members is completely voluntary and there are no incentives for completion of the study. To participate

1. Completion of the informed consent which is attached in the link below

2. Completion of a 5-minute survey to collect basic demographic and employee satisfaction both at work and at home.

3. Willing to participate in a two-week intervention to help improve the behavior or stress indicators that inhibit employees.

If you are interested to participate in this research study please click the link attached below to complete parts one and two until further instructions are given for the intervention. If you have any questions or concerns please reach out to the researcher of this project for the information is attached below.

Link to survey:

https://saintleo.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_eroGKen68Rhthmm

Thank you,

Isilena Lebron
Saint Leo University

isilena.lebron@saintleo.edu

Appendix B

Informed Consent Document to do Research

Researcher: Isilena Lebron

Study Name: Employee Satisfaction

Institution: Saint Leo University

The following information is to inform you about the research study and its participation in it. Please read carefully all of the questions and answer as honestly as possible for the study. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the researcher. You also have the right to withdraw from the study at any time, if desired. If any risks arise for you, or the researcher in participating in this study, please notify the researcher.

1. Purpose of the study

The purpose of the study is to find the satisfaction of employees in a workplace based on their workload and communication with upper management.

2. Design of the study

The participants will be asked to answer questions about the workload and communication where they are employed. It will be on a five-point scale, which should take approximately 4 to 5 minutes.

3. Cost of Research

There is no cost for the study.

4. Risk and options

There are no risks or discomfort with participation in this study. None of the measures bring a risk to the participants. None of the data will be used against the participants and will be kept anonymous from employers.

5. Liability

There will be no compensation for participants, and if there are any study-related injuries.

Statement by a person who agreed to participate

I have read this informed consent and all the information that is written above. I understand each section and will contact you if I have any questions. I volunteered to take this survey with the knowledge that I can withdraw at any moment with no penalties

· I agree to consent

· I disagree to consent

Appendix C

image1

image2

image3

image4