Stressors, resources, and strain at work: A longitudinal test of the triple-match principle.

TLDR

Two longitudinal studies examined how matching job stressors and resources predicts job‑related strain. The study hypothesized that resources most effectively moderate the stressor–strain relationship when stressors, resources, and strains all match, less so when only two match, and least when none match. The triple‑match principle was tested with 280 and 267 health‑care workers across two longitudinal surveys. Moderating effects were found in 33.3 % of interactions with a triple match, 16.7 % with a double match, and none with no match, with strongest consistency for emotional or physical matches.

Abstract

Two longitudinal studies investigated the issue of match between job stressors and job resources in the prediction of job-related strain. On the basis of the triple-match principle (TMP), it was hypothesized that resources are most likely to moderate the relation between stressors and strains if resources, stressors, and strains all match. Resources are less likely to moderate the relation between stressors and strains if (a) only resources and stressors match, (b) only resources and strains match, or (c) only stressors and strains match. Resources are least likely to moderate the relation between stressors and strains if there is no match among stressors, resources, and strains. The TMP was tested among 280 and 267 health care workers in 2 longitudinal surveys. The likelihood of finding moderating effects was linearly related to the degree of match, with 33.3% of all tested interactions becoming significant when there was a triple match, 16.7% when there was a double match, and 0.0% when there was no match. Findings were most consistent if there was an emotional match or a physical match.