Masterproef II neergelegd tot het behalen van de graad van

Transcription

1 FACULTEIT PSYCHOLOGIE EN PEDAGOGISCHE WETENSCHAPPEN Masterproef II neergelegd tot het behalen van de graad van Promotor: Copromotor:

2 Abstract The aim of this master s thesis was to investigate the recovery potential of running after work as an off-job activity. Recovery was measured by means of the four recovery experiences psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery experiences and control. The main hypothesis was that the longer an employee ran after work, the more recovery happened. Also someone s intention to run, talking about work, being a member of a club, sharing running experiences online and the needs of the Selfdetermination Theory were taken into account. In the morning, 324 workers completed an online questionnaire about their run the day before. Linear regression analyses showed that running activities as well as running because of the social aspect were positively related to psychological detachment. Additionally, discussing work-related affairs was related to less detachment and being a member of a club to less control. Surprisingly, less feelings of mastery and control were reported when the runner shared his running performance on social media. To end, need for relatedness moderated the relation between running because of a social goal and detachment and control in a negative direction.

3 Index Abstract...0 Index...1 Prologue...3 Introduction...4 Recovery Experiences...5 Concepts...5 Psychological detachment Relaxation Mastery experiences... 7 Control... 7 Recovery...8 Recovery theories... 9 Recovery settings...10 Contributions recovery experiences to recovery Psychological detachment...11 Relaxation...12 Mastery experiences Control...12 Recovery experiences and outcomes of health and well- being...13 Recovery experiences and organizational outcomes...15 Antecedents of Recovery Experiences Off- job activities and recovery...16 Off- job activities and recovery experiences...17 Recovery Activities...18 Concepts Resource- consuming activities...18 Job- related activities...18 Household and childcare activities...19 Resource- providing activities Low- effort activities...20 Social activities...21 Physical activities...21 Current Study...24 Running Activities Aspects of Running Activities Continuous measure...25 Physical activities Social activities Conjunction of physical and social activity Discussing work- related affairs...27 Membership of a club...28 Social sharing Self-determination Theory Methods...31 Procedure

4 Sample Measures Recovery experience...35 Self- determination Theory Qualitative data Results...36 Psychological detachment Relaxation Mastery experiences Control Discussion...50 Limitations...54 Contributions and Practical Implications...56 Future Research...58 Conclusion...59 References...60 Nederlandstalige Samenvatting

5 Prologue With this master s thesis, I finish six years of studying at the University of Ghent. During the last two years I wrote my thesis in good spirits, which became possible due to the support of several people. First of all I would like to express my gratitude to my copromotor dr. Bart Van de Ven. For giving me the research topic I desired, but above all for the thorough guidance. During two years, he offered genuine concern in my topic, time to answer questions and valuable comments and suggestions. He was also receptive to my interests. Thanks to him I have written this thesis in English and could intertwine my main passtime - namely running - in this work. I would also like to thank Prof. dr. Peter Vlerick for taking over the role of promotor. I would like to thank all the participants that were willing to fill in the questionnaire, running.be as well as everyone who shared or forwarded the link to my questionnaire. Finally, I want to address a special thanks to my family and friends for their good advice and support. Especially I want to express a huge appreciation to my parents for giving me the opportunity to study in the first place and for their not ceasing support and motivation to continue working at this thesis. Even more in particular to my mother for the efforts she did to help me reaching more than 400 respondents. After reading all the comments of runners who completed the questionnaire, I am even more convinced of the wide range of positive effects running as a passtime has. Whenever there is a moment wherein I forget how beneficial running is to me, I will try to recall this belief. To come towards the gender neutral norms of APA, whenever the personal pronouns he or his are used in the text, they imply the use of the words she or her as well. Danielle Dewickere,

6 Introduction The daily life of most people is a cycle of work and rest. As a result, a huge amount of one s time is taken by the job. Not only the hours someone is present on the work floor count. A job also occupies a lot of time and thoughts of employees outside the official working hours. Employees accomplish additional job-related tasks at home because of a deadline or an overload of work, they answer s and phone calls in the evening and already think about their next working day (Derks, ten Brummelhuis, Zecic, & Bakker, 2012; Sonnentag, 2001). In this way, workers may have difficulties to recover completely from work. That is, spending time on one s job brings along demands and stressors. This exposure possibly results in stress when the worker cannot recover from his working day. Recovery refers to the process during which an individual s functioning returns to its prestressor level and in which strain is reduced (Craig & Cooper, 1992 in Kinnunen, Feldt, Siltaloppi, & Sonnentag, 2011). The aim of this master s thesis is to examine the role that off-job activities, and running activities in particular, play in the recovery process after a working day. The first part is a review of what is already known on recovery. The mechanisms and effects of recovery will be explained with a central role for the four recovery experiences psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery and control (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007). These experiences help recovery and can be seen as personal strategies one uses to repair his energy levels (Kinnunen, Feldt, Siltaloppi, & Sonnentag, 2011). Next, the antecedents and actions for a successful recovery will be discussed. These are activities people engage in during off-job time. In this master s thesis, the focus will lie on one specific activity a lot of people engage in after working hours - namely running. In the second part, running activities in the evening after work will be examined in relation to the four recovery experiences. This study exceeds former literature because various aspects related to the experience of running are included. Next to the effect of going for a run after work on the four recovery experiences, the effect of running in group, discussing work-related affairs and membership of a club are included here. Also social sharing, that is reporting about your run on the internet, is explored as an aspect that potentially influences the recovery experiences. Furthermore, the reinforcing role of three basic psychological needs on the relation between running activities and recovery 4

7 experiences will be examined: need for competence, need for autonomy and need for relatedness. When fulfilled, these needs are expected to motivate the individual, help him performing well and experiencing well-being (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Recovery Experiences Concepts A huge amount of time is taken by someone s job, both at the place of work and outside the official working hours. A job can bring along job demands. These are aspects of the job that require sustained physical, cognitive or emotional effort, such as time pressure (Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001). To deal with job demands, every individual possesses mental and physical resources. These are aspects of the job that are functional in achieving work goals and that stimulate personal growth (Demerouti et al., 2001). Examples are attention, energy, autonomy and task variety. Job demands however, can become chronic (e.g. work overload or emotional demands) and turn into stressors (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). As these stressors deplete the employee s resources, mental and physical health suffers. For example burnout, a syndrome mainly characterized by emotional exhaustion develops (Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001; Schaufeli, Bakker, & Van Rhenen, 2009) and prevalence of cardiovascular problems (Cooper & Marshall, 1976) rises. Recovery from work plays an important role in this relation, with both direct and indirect effects on employee s health and well-being (Demerouti, Bakker, Geurts, & Taris, 2009; Etzion, 2003). Recovery refers to the process during which an individual s functioning returns to its prestressor level and in which strain is reduced (Craig & Cooper, 1992 in Kinnunen, Feldt, Siltaloppi, & Sonnentag, 2011). Two main theories explain the effects on health and well-being. The first is the Effort-Recovery model from Meijman and Mulder (1998), which states that recovery occurs when someone is no longer confronted with high work demands. The second theory was conceptualized by Hobfoll (1989) and is called the Conservation of Resources theory. It states that, when confronted with demands during work, the resources of the worker are threatened. Both theories will be clarified in the paragraph Recovery. 5

8 The positive effect of recovery on well-being has been found in literature repeatedly. For example, thinking positively about work during non-work time decreases feelings of burnout (Fritz & Sonnentag, 2005), not thinking about work at all is negatively related to fatigue and positively to positive mood (Sonnentag & Bayer, 2005) and recovery training programs decrease perceived stress (Hahn, Binnewies, Sonnentag, & Mojza, 2011). Also a large amount of research has been conducted on recovery and work related outcomes. Being recovered in the morning is positively related to daily task performance and organizational citizenship behavior (Binnewies, Sonnentag, & Mojza, 2009) and leads to more work engagement (ten Brummelhuis & Bakker, 2012). However, the mechanisms that underlie these relations have been investigated less. In 2007, these mechanisms were described by Sonnentag and Fritz as recovery experiences. With confirmatory factor analyses, they found four recovery experiences that can be differentiated. These are psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery experiences and control during leisure time. Thus recovery experiences are the processes that underlie the relation between recovery on one hand and health and performance on the other hand. These mechanisms help recovery and can be seen as personal strategies in which individuals try to restore their energy resources and maintain well-being despite stressful situations (Kinnunen, Feldt, Siltaloppi, & Sonnentag, 2011). They are helpful in recuperating and unwinding from work and are associated with several off-job activities and various psychological and physiological outcomes (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007). The four recovery experiences psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery experiences and control are outlined here. Their link with recovery and well-being is clarified in depth later on. Psychological detachment. During off-job time employees are physically away from work. However, this does not imply that they have left their job psychologically behind. Some have to finish work-related tasks at home or prepare themselves for the next working day. Others will keep on thinking about their job or even start ruminating about job-related problems. When we speak about psychological detachment however, both count: someone has to be physically away from the workplace and stop thinking 6

9 about job-related affairs. Etzion, Eden and Lapidot (1998) define it as an individual s sense of being away from the work situation (p 579). It means that someone disengages mentally from work during off-job time (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007) and does not think about his work anymore. One could say that a worker literally switches off mentally from his job (Sonnentag & Bayer, 2005). Relaxation. A second recovery experience is relaxation. This refers to a state of low arousal and activation and increased positive affect (Stone, Kennedy-Moore, & Neale, 1995). It can occur because of activities that relax the body and mind, examples are progressive muscle relaxation and meditation (van Hooff & Baas, 2013). Other activities that can result in relaxation are walking, reading or listening to music (Kühnel & Sonnentag, 2011). Mastery experiences. Mastery experiences result from off-job activities that are challenging for the individual and that have the possibility to learn in domains outside of work. People experience feelings of competence and proficiency when engaging in these sorts of activities. Examples of these mastery-related activities are learning a new sport or language, learning to play a new musical instrument, or climbing a mountain (Fritz & Sonnentag, 2006). Also volunteer work provides opportunities to master challenges and learn new things during leisure time (Mojza, Lorenz, Sonnentag, & Binnewies, 2010). In contrast to relaxation experiences, mastery experiences provoke a high activation. One has to invest additional efforts in order to experience feelings of mastery. Control. The fourth recovery experience, control implies that a person is able to choose an action from two or more options. When we apply this to leisure time it refers to freely deciding to engage in an activity during off-job time that requires different demands than work activities. Thus, it includes the ability to choose which activity to pursue, when it will be pursued and how this will be done (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007). 7

10 Recovery In the previous paragraph, the four recovery experiences (psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery experiences and control) are defined. They are relevant because they are part of the preconditions of successful recovery after work. The recovery experiences are rooted in theories that explicitly deal with recovery. Psychological detachment and relaxation are compatible with the Effort-Recovery (E-R) model from Meijman and Mulder (1998), mastery and control with the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory from Hobfoll (1989). These theories are complementary. In the following, both theories are described and their link with the recovery experiences is explained. In the second paragraph, possible recovery settings are discussed. The third paragraph describes the specific contributions of each recovery experience to recovery. In the fourth and fifth paragraph finally, links between recovery experiences and outcomes of health and work are discussed. In figure 1 the main concepts that are described in this first part of the master s thesis, that is the review, are organized. Later on, figure 2 will show the concepts used in the hypotheses and analyses. Recovery Activities Resource- consuming Job- related Houshold and childcare Resource- providing Low- effort Social Physical Recovery Experiences Psychological Detachment Relaxation Mastery Experiences Control Recovery Health and well- being Organizational outcomes Figure 1. Main concepts 8

11 Recovery theories. Recovery is defined as a process during which an individual s stressed functional or psychobiological systems return to their prestressor level and in which strain from one s job is reduced (Meijman & Mulder, 1998). The E-R model states that effort expenditure at work leads to load reactions such as excretion of stress hormones, negative affect and feelings of fatigue. When a person is no longer exposed to work demands, load reactions are released and recovery can occur. With psychological detachment and relaxation, no further demands are made on the functional systems and internal resources called upon during work. This is why they can contribute to successful recovery. The stressors causing strain reactions are no longer present when one relaxes or detaches psychologically from work. The COR theory states that people attempt to acquire, retain, protect and enhance their resources. Hobfoll (1989) defines these resources as objects, personal characteristics, conditions or energies that are valued by the individual or that serve as a means for attainment of these objects, personal characteristics, conditions or energies. Resources can be categorized as internal entities (personal characteristics or energies) or as external entities (objects, conditions or financial assets) (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007). Dealing with job demands drains resources, which means that the resources are threatened or lost. If this happens or when no resources are gained after resource investment, stress occurs. During recovery, an individual s resources can be replenished. This is how mastery and control are helpful for recovery. They build up resources such as energy, positive mood and feelings of control. In this way, threatened resources are restored (Kinnunen & Feldt, 2011). The E-R model and COR theory thus both emphasize the importance of sufficient recovery from work effort and stress. They do this through two complementary processes. First, employees refrain from job demands. They use other functional systems or resources than during work. Second, employees repair threatened or lost resources by gaining new ones. If someone recovers completely from work, this person can start his new working day recuperated. However, after an insufficient recovery the employee will start in a suboptimal condition (Demerouti et al., 2009). Additional work effort is required to maintain the desired job performance. This means that higher demands are placed on 9

12 the recovery process whereby a vicious circle starts. It results in a negative process of accumulation of load effects with a negative effect on health and well-being. The Allostatic Load Theory (McEwen, 1998) describes this vicious circle and relates it to physiological processes in the body. The theory assumes that allostatic systems (e.g., immune system) will malfunction in a chronic situation of repeated exposure to job stressors and insufficient recovery. These allostatic systems are crucial for maintaining bodily homeostasis and for dealing effectively with environmental challenges. There are two ways of malfunctioning: overactivity which means that the systems fail to shut-off and inactivity, they fail to respond adequately (Geurts, Beckers, & Tucker, 2013). Both can result in serious health risks. Overactivity can occur because of emotionally highdemanding work strain with a spillover effect to the situation outside of work. The allostatic systems will keep on working during off-job time (Brosschot, Pieper & Thayer, 2005). As a result, the worker will experience difficulties regarding his sleep quality (Akerstedt, Fredlund, Gillberg, & Jansson, 2002; Winwood, Bakker, & Winefield, 2007). Inactivity caused by chronic stress can lead to insensitivity of the body regarding viruses and bacteries. These infectious agents can enter the body easily and lead to infectious diseases (Clow, 2001 in van Hooff, Geurts, Kompier, & Taris, 2007). Recovery settings. People have several opportunities to recover from job-related strain. Chances already show up during work. Recovery can take place between two single tasks, when changing tasks or during a formal break (Trougakos & Hideg, 2009). Although these breaks can be very beneficial, one has little possibilities to engage in specific leisure activities during hours of work. These occasions arise outside the working hours, with vacations as the longest respite periods. For most employees, they last approximately two weeks. Usually, no high duty activities have to be done here. One can freely choose how to spend his days. Ample evidence exists concerning the fade-out effect of vacation (de Bloom et al., 2009). People feel recovered when returning to work, but they do not benefit very long from their vacation. For example, the salutary effects on work engagement and burnout faded out within one month after the vacation among teachers (Kühnel & Sonnentag, 2011). Beneficial effects of vacation decreased after a few days and faded completely 10

13 within three weeks in a quasi-experiment with clerical employees (Westman & Eden, 1997). Ending with a sample of university employees, fade-out effects for health complaints were found two weeks after vacation (Fritz & Sonnentag, 2006). A shorter time period during which recovery can take place is the weekend. Although people differ in the way they use them, weekends have been found to be an opportunity for recovery (van Hooff et al., 2007). For example, one can keep up with his social network and profit from the social support (Sonnentag, 2001). Specific weekend experiences, such as positive work reflection decreased burnout for employees of emergency medical services (Fritz & Sonnentag, 2005). In fact, one can engage in all sorts of activities during the weekend. The same stands for week evenings after work (Tucker, Dahlgren, Akerstedt, & Waterhouse, 2008), regular respite periods with the possibility to recover. For example, recovery during the evening of working days led to more proactive behavior among public service employees (Sonnentag, 2003). Usually, some obligatory things such as household tasks have to be done. Next to these commitments, people can engage in freely chosen passtimes. As week evenings are the focus of this study, a more in-depth review of its opportunities will be provided later on. Contributions recovery experiences to recovery. According to the E-R model (Meijman & Mulder, 1998), psychological detachment and relaxation are beneficial for recovery because no demands are placed upon the worker. Consistent with the COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989), mastery experiences and control during leisure time create new resources. A broader understanding of the contribution of each recovery experience to recovery is provided in this paragraph. Psychological detachment. As the E-R Model (Meijman & Mulder, 1998) states that recovery occurs when no further demands are made on the functional systems used during work, we can expect that psychological detachment is associated with recovery. When people detach from work, demands on the functional systems called upon during work will decrease. This in contrast with people who keep on thinking about their work and as a result do not psychologically detach. For this people, the same functional 11

14 systems will be loaded as during work, with the consequence that they may not fully recover. Relaxation. As with psychological detachment, with relaxation no further demands are made on functional systems called upon during work (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007). Consequently, regeneration of psychological and physiological systems will take place (Meijman & Mulder, 1998). The recovery experience relaxation is able to reduce activation and increase positive affect. These two processes are important for recovery. First, job stressors can lead to illness (Teasdale, 2006). Prolonged activation is expected to mediate this relation (Brosschot et al., 2005), in such a way that the employee s functional systems remain activated due to stressful work. This overactivity can result in health problems (Geurts et al., 2013). A process that weakens the extended activation is thus very helpful for recovery to take place. Second, positive affective states are helpful in coping with negative affective states such as stress. They can also replenish resources which is an important part of recovery. Thus the positive emotions that a relaxation experience brings along can help to reduce negative affect resulting from a stressful job. In a quantitative meta-analysis from van der Klink, Blonk, Schene and van Dijk (2001), a relaxation experience (pure relaxation techniques or techniques embedded in a multimodal program) proved to be effective for psychological resources and responses like self-esteem and coping skills, for physiology including tension and adrenaline level and for complaints such as burnout rates and somatic symptoms. Mastery experiences. The actions that lead to mastery experiences outside the job put additional demands on the person. They ask some degree of effort investment (Sonnentag, Binnewies, & Mojza, 2008), though without overtaxing the capabilities of this person. Mastery experiences can create new internal resources such as skills and competencies (Bandura, 1997) and a positive mood (Parkinson & Totterdell, 1999). This is how mastery experiences are expected to contribute to recovery. Control. The possibility to freely decide which activities to pursue during leisure time provides opportunities to recover from job strain. It has the potential to build up depleted or new internal resources. Sonnentag and Fritz (2007) stated that the 12

15 experience of control during leisure time can increase self-efficacy and feelings of competence by satisfying one s desire to control things in life. In consequence, control may act as an external resource that promotes recovery from work. Recovery experiences and outcomes of health and well-being. The association between the four recovery experiences and health and well-being has been established several times in research. An overview of these findings is given in the following paragraphs. Sonnentag and Fritz (2007) developed a measure to assess all four recovery experiences. In their study on the validation of this questionnaire, an examination of correlations between recovery experiences and possible consequences is included. Their results suggest that psychological detachment is the most relevant recovery experience. Of the four experiences, it shows the strongest relations with impaired psychological well-being. Psychological detachment was negatively related to emotional exhaustion, depressive symptoms, need for recovery and sleep problems and positively related to life satisfaction. Following psychological well-being, physical well-being suffers from low psychological detachment. This is demonstrated with a negative relation between psychological detachment and health complaints in the correlational study by Sonnentag and Fritz (2007). Brosschot, Gerin, and Thayer (2006) describe perseverative cognition as a cognitive-emotional process that occurs when someone worries or ruminates. Because this process expands the duration of a stressor, physiological activation is prolonged which contributes to ill health. A comparison can be made with low detachment, when no distraction from job-related thoughts occurs. The three other recovery experiences turned out to have moderate relationships with well-being measures in Sonnentag and Fritz (2007) study. Relaxation, mastery experiences and control were negatively related to need for recovery and emotional exhaustion and positively related to life satisfaction. The association between mastery experiences and exhaustion is also found in a longitudinal study from Fritz and Sonnentag (2006) on vacation effects. Higher levels of mastery experiences during vacation were related to lower levels of exhaustion when the employee returned to 13

16 work. Like psychological detachment, relaxation and control showed significant relationships with health complaints (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007) Recovery experiences are crucial for someone s affective states on a short time period. They can improve a person s affect at bedtime but also the next morning. Over a period of three working days, Sonnentag and Bayer (2005) gathered daily survey data. In this study, psychological detachment from work was positively associated to positive mood and negatively related to low fatigue at bedtime. Sonnentag et al. (2008) expanded these findings in a diary study over the course of one working week. Low psychological detachment from work during leisure time was associated with negative activation and fatigue in the evening, at bedtime and the next morning. Relaxation was related to morning serenity while mastery experiences were related to high positive activation in the morning. Later Sonnentag and Binnewies (2013) found a spillover effect of negative affect at work to the next morning. This relation was attenuated by sleep and psychological detachment from work during evening hours. Thus, mainly psychological detachment is beneficial for affective well-being, but also other recovery experiences contribute. Some longitudinal studies showed that recovery experiences matter on the long term too. Poor psychological detachment from work during leisure time predicted higher emotional exhaustion one year later. It also buffered the relation between job demands and an increase in psychosomatic complaints (Sonnentag et al., 2010). In an exhaustive study on recovery, psychological detachment mediated the relation between job demands and fatigue (Pennonen, 2011). In that way, successful detachment works protective when high job demands such as time pressure cause strain and health complaints. It turns out in this paragraph that the four recovery experiences are beneficial for someone s health and this in several ways. Most relations are found for psychological detachment with among others positive effects on psychological well-being and positive mood (Sonnentag & Bayer, 2005). It also buffers several negative effects of job demands (Pennonen, 2011; Sonnentag et al., 2010). A positive relation with life satisfaction and a negative relation with exhaustion and need for recovery are found for all four recovery experiences (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007). 14

17 Recovery experiences and organizational outcomes. As described in the previous section, research showed the effect of recovery experiences on outcomes of employee health and well-being. Research also revealed effects on organizational outcomes, which are presented here. Fritz et al. (2010) found a curvilinear relation between psychological detachment and job performance. Job performance benefits thus the most from average levels of psychological detachment whereas well-being is increased most by high levels of detachment. In this study, job performance implied task performance and proactive behavior as reported by one s coworker. In a study on the Job Demands-Resources model, psychological detachment mediated fully between job demands and fatigue during work (Kinnunen et al., 2011). It also buffers between high job demands and a decrease in work engagement (Sonnentag et al., 2010). When facing high job demands, one will detach more psychologically. This will lead to less fatigue at work. It will also inhibit a large decrease in work engagement. Mastery mediated partially the effects of job resources on work engagement (Kinnunen et al., 2011). An employee with few job control and social support from colleagues will experience less feelings of mastery, which results in less work engagement. This paragraph makes clear that recovery is not only important for the employee and his well-being. Also employers will benefit from the recovery experiences that their workers undergo. These workers are more protected against the negative effects of job demands, show more work engagement and experience less fatigue at work (Kinnunen et al., 2011; Sonnentag et al., 2010) when experiencing recovery. Most relations are found with psychological detachment, both for the influences on health and well-being as on work-related outcomes. It is important to notice here that the amount of research on relaxation, mastery experiences and control is marginal compared to that on psychological detachment. Many studies target psychological detachment specifically (Fritz, Yankelevich, Zarubin, & Barger, 2010; Sonnentag, 2012; Sonnentag & Bayer, 2005). As it is the recovery experience most examined, it shows most relationships with relevant outcomes. Adding value to literature, this master s thesis will include all four recovery experiences. 15

18 Antecedents of Recovery Experiences Off-job activities and recovery. When we look at the two complementary processes from the ER and COR theories (Hobfoll, 1989; Meijman & Mulder, 1998), people recover when they can refrain from work demands and when they restore lost or threatened resources during off-job time. It is thus crucial that the resources used on the work floor are not further called upon during leisure time. But is being released from any work demands enough for an employee to fully recover? Early empirical research showed that mere the availability of time periods that allow for the restoration of resources drawn upon during work is crucial to recover from work demands (Sonnentag, 2001). For example, in a quasi-experiment from Westman and Eden (1997), the burnout level of clerical employees was lower during and immediately after vacation. With a control group study, Etzion, Eden and Lapidot (1998) showed that even a period of compulsory military service can be beneficial for jobstress and burnout. Here, the role of recovery experiences emerges yet, as psychological detachment strengthens the positive effect of military service on wellbeing. Later, research started focusing on specific activities people engage in when not on the job (Rook & Zijlstra, 2006; Sonnentag, 2001). The benefits and detriments of these activities for employee health and well-being have been shown in several studies. In a diary study over seven days, conducted with 46 employees from three different organizations, physical activities decreased fatigue levels (Rook & Zijlstra, 2006). In a longitudinal study with 87 emergency service workers, pursuing social activities during the weekend was negatively related to burnout and poor general well-being (Fritz & Sonnentag, 2005). 47 flight attendants on the other hand, reported higher depression levels after having spent time on social activities in the evening. This was examined in a diary study over four workdays (Sonnentag & Natter, 2004). Iso-Ahola (1997) summarized the effects of leisure on well-being. These include that general leisure participation leads to self-esteem, life satisfaction and reduced depression. Physical exercise improves cognitive functioning, reduces anxiety and increases chances of living longer. To end, a diary study with 100 Dutch teachers (Sonnentag, 2001) showed the independent contribution of leisure activities and low-stress work situation to an 16

19 employee s well-being. This means that off-job activities have an additional effect on recovery, beyond the positive effect of mere relief of work stressors and demands. Off-job activities and recovery experiences. Based on the work of Sonnentag (2001), six different types of off-job activities are differentiated in leisure literature. They are categorized into two groups - namely leisure time activities with a high-duty profile or resource-consuming activities and leisure time activities with a potential for recovery or resource-providing activities (Fritz & Sonnentag, 2006). Activities with a high-duty profile are job-related activities and household and child-care activities (Sonnentag, 2001). They include tasks that someone has to accomplish and are more or less obligatory. Finishing a task for the job, cleaning and picking up children from school are examples. Activities with a potential for recovery are low-effort activities, social activities and physical activities (Sonnentag, 2001). Unlike the first category of activities, they don t possess an element of obligation so people are free to engage in one of these. Examples comprise sitting on the sofa, having dinner with friends and running, the activity that will specifically be investigated in this study. The two categories and their activities are made clear and illustrated further in the paragraph Recovery Activities. The relation between off-job activities and recovery experiences is suggested and reported several times in literature. Some examples are provided here. With their integrated model of the stress-recovery process of students, Ragsdale, Beehr, Grebner and Han (2011) wanted to extend recovery research outside the work context. 221 psychology students completed questionnaires before and after the weekend. Resourceproviding activities turned out to be relaxing and to allow for feelings of psychological detachment and control. Resource-consuming activities on the other hand, showed negative relations with relaxation and psychological detachment. No relations with mastery experiences were found. Ten Brummelhuis and Bakker (2012) came to a similar finding with 74 Dutch nurses. Work-related and household activities decreased psychological detachment and relaxation, whereas leisure activities increased these recovery experiences. Specifically for physical activities, Feuerhahn, Sonnentag and Woll (2014) found a positive relation with psychological detachment in a work context. 17

20 Their 126 German participants were derived from a variety of occupations and engaged regularly in exercise activities. Both studies were diary studies conducted over five consecutive workdays. To conclude, different off-job activities can lead to different recovery experiences after work. Each effective activity is explained in the next paragraph, together with its beneficial or harmful consequences. Recovery Activities Concepts Off-job time activities comprise all possible activities someone can engage in outside their working hours. In the previous section they are divided into two categories, resource-consuming activities and resource-providing activities. Resource-consuming activities, as their name indicates, make use of important resources. They draw on resources that are similar as those used during work. This requires effort and prolongs the stress response (Meijman & Mulder, 1998). Resource-providing activities have the potential to restore affective and energetic resources used during work, such as positive mood and vigor (Feuerhahn et al., 2014). Furthermore, they are able to protect and create new resources. These capabilities are beneficial for recovery, as described in the COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989). We can state that resource-providing activities are called leisure time activities in daily life. The different types of activities belonging to these two categories are described in depth here, leading to the scope of this master s thesis, - namely the physical activity running. Resource-consuming activities. Job-related activities. Finishing work assignments at home, discussing incidents of the previous workday or preparing for the next workday are examples of job-related activities. Employees complete tasks in relation to their work which makes them exploit the same resources as those needed during working hours. This is how the exposure to stress mediators is continued. Some task-related activities, activities that have nothing to do with one s regular job but refer to one s private life are included here as well (Sonnentag, 2001). Examples that fall in this task-related category are completing tax 18

21 declarations and paying bills. They are not connected to the employee s regular job but evoke the same effects on one s functional systems as work-related activities. All these activities make it difficult for an employee to cognitively distract, which impedes the recovery process. Recovery is especially hindered for people who face high cognitive requirements and need a high ability to concentrate in their job (Sonnentag, 2001). Additionally, workers are increasingly connected to work during free time. As a result of economic competition, they often have to be available for their organization all day. Through modern technology, it is also possible to be accessible and to stay in touch with work during evening hours. More technology use for work-related affairs at home is related to less psychological detachment during off-job time (Park, Fritz, & Jex, 2011). Also the work-home interference of employees using their smartphone during non-work time has increased. Consequently, the smartphone users have more difficulties with engaging in recovery activities. They experienced none of the four recovery experiences in a diary study with 40 employees and a control group (Derks, ten Brummelhuis, Zecic, & Bakker, 2012). The loss in control over information can form an extra stressor during leisure time (Edmunds & Morris, 2000). Empirical findings regarding job-related activities are consistent. The activities are related to fatigue and poor well-being at bedtime as well as to a higher need for recovery (Sonnentag, 2001; Sonnentag & Natter, 2004; Sonnentag & Zijlstra, 2006). Household and childcare activities. Going to a grocery store, paying attention to the children and cooking fall into the category of household and childcare activities. They require one s active commitment and are often cognitively demanding. However they draw on different resources than those needed to complete one s job (Sonnentag, 2001). This is how they can provide opportunities to recover from work strain. On the other hand, household and childcare activities possess a sense of obligation (Demerouti et al., 2009). They can be postponed to the next evening when someone feels too tired but have to be completed sooner or later. When the task is accomplished whilst fatigued, prolongation of load reactions occurs. This is how household and childcare activities can form a threat for someone s personal resources. Also for people with a job as cleaning-person or caretaker in a nursery, this type of activities is a threat for the personal resources (Sonnentag, 2001). 19

22 Household and childcare activities have been examined in several studies. No relations with fatigue and well-being have been found so far (Sonnentag, 2001; Sonnentag & Bayer, 2005; Sonnentag & Natter, 2004; Sonnentag & Zijlstra, 2006). A possible explanation is that the positive and negative effects of these activities neutralize each other as household and childcare activities are always considered together (Demerouti et al., 2009). Resource-providing activities. Low-effort-, social- and physical activities do not place any job demands on one s functional systems. When engaging in these activities, the worker is not confronted with work-related stressors (unless when discussing workrelated affairs or problems, see later on). As a consequence, the psychobiological systems will return to their prestressor levels (Sonnentag, 2001). Additionally, occupational resources will be restored and new resources will be gained. Low-effort activities. Watching tv, reading and listening to music are examples of low-effort activities. No demands are made on the functional systems called upon during work so when performing these type of activities, someone does not draw heavily on energy resources. Taking a bath, going for a walk or performing meditation can also be classified into the category of low-effort activities. Whereas some authors discuss these examples as a separate category of activities - namely relaxation activities - they are ranked as low-effort activities in this study (Kühnel & Sonnentag, 2011). This because little effort has to be made when engaging in these activities and activation is reduced. A second motive is that the relaxation experience can be considered as a possible consequence of both relaxation activities and other types of activities (ten Brummelhuis & Bakker, 2012). It is an underlying mechanism of recovery and can thus be termed as a recovery experience (Fritz & Sonnentag, 2007). Low-effort activities are also seen as passive activities (Sonnentag, 2001). According to Iso-Ahola (1997), passivity during leisure time is associated with boredom and leads to apathy and lethargy. Nonetheless, Sonnentag (2001) claims that both active and passive leisure activities are beneficial for well-being. In her comprehensive study on off-job activities where 100 Dutch school teachers kept up to a diary over five consecutive workdays, low-effort activities had a positive effect on one s situational 20

23 well-being before sleep (Sonnentag, 2001). Subsequent research could not confirm this salutary effect of low-effort activities. Low-effort activities led to little or no recovery when measured by flight attendants over 4 working days (Sonnentag & Natter, 2004), neither over 7 days by employees with different occupational roles (Rook & Zijlstra, 2006). In the last study, low-effort activities were even associated with increased levels of subjective fatigue. Social activities. In this type of activities, people have social contact with other persons they like (Sonnentag 2001). Visiting friends, going to a party or phoning with a family member are examples. The force of these activities is the social support someone receives while performing them. Social support can be seen as an external resource that aids repairing worn-out resources (Pennonen, 2011). In a sample with more than 1000 employees, social support from colleagues diminishes the negative impact job demands have on psychological well-being (Bakker, Demerouti, & Euwema, 2005). A second mechanism is similar to that in other leisure activities. No demands are made on the person and job-related resources can be restored (Oerlemans, Bakker, & Demerouti, 2014). Unless this person works in a job with social contact, for example as a customer server. These workers face a high amount of social interaction while working. They need to regulate their emotions and expressions continuously during these interactions. Sonnentag (2001) argues that the emotion regulation in these jobs is much higher than what they manage during private social activities. Hence they are able to experience a relief from job strains even so. Just like low-effort activities, research regarding social activities is mixed. Some evidence on the beneficial effects exists, where well-being at bedtime is improved and one s need to recover is diminished (Sonnentag, 2001; Sonnentag & Zijlstra, 2006). In two other studies, social activities were not conducive to recovery. There was no relation with positive mood and fatigue at bedtime (Rook & Zijlstra, 2006; Sonnentag & Bayer, 2005). As with low-effort activities, Sonnentag and Natter (2004) observed stronger feelings of depression at bedtime after social activities. Physical activities. Physical activities consist of a wide range of activities including exercise, sports, fitness training, et cetera (Feuerhahn et al., 2014; Oerlemans 21

24 et al., 2014). Again, these activities help restoring and renewing resources. They are conceptually differentiated from work tasks (Rook & Zijlstra, 2006) and like this cognitively undemanding. On the other hand are they physically heavy (Sonnentag, 2001). People have to invest a lot of energy when performing this type of activities. For some occupations physical activities therefore draw upon the same resources as those used during work - namely physical resources (Sonnentag, 2001). To these occupations belong jobs with heavy physical demands such as construction work. Thus physical activities cannot be classified as resource-providing activities for a certain group of employees. However, it is plausible that these acts still use different physical resources than those during work. Physical activities also bring distraction from the job. They provide a time-out or respite from worrying thoughts and job-related stressors (Yeung, 1996). Contrary to low-effort and social activities, consistent findings exist solely for physical activities. A positive effect on well-being among several samples is found (Sonnentag, 2001; Sonnentag & Bayer, 2005; Sonnentag & Natter, 2004). These effects include less need for recovery, increased vigor, enhanced positive mood, reduced negative mood, reduced anxiety (Kwan & Bryan, 2010), lower levels of depression (Sonnentag & Zijlstra, 2006) and improved sleep quality (Winwood, Bakker, & Winefield, 2007). In the latest study on physical activities, exercise after work was related to positive affective states such as activation and alertness (Feuerhahn et al., 2014). The authors hypothesized that psychological detachment explained the beneficial effect of spending time on physical off-job activities. They conducted a diary study over five consecutive workdays wherein a wide range of exercise activities were associated with positive affect in the evening. The participants, holding a variety of different jobs engaged regularly in exercise activities during leisure time. The recovery experience psychological detachment was a mediator between physical activities and positive affect in such a way that individuals who spend more time on physical activities detached more psychologically from work. This psychological detachment led to higher levels of positive affect. The leisure time exercise activity included in this study is jogging or running, an activity becoming more and more popular over the years. 22

25 Running is a trendy sport throughout the world. It is exercised in the form of track and field by millions of children, youngsters and adults. Due to the fitness idea, running programs such as governmental actions and numerous events, the running sport as a passtime reaches an important part of our population. Data regarding the most popular sports in Flanders show running in the top five (Scheerder & Steens, 2006). In Flanders, popularization and democratization of the running sport arose in the 1970s (Scheerder, 2009). Researchers suggest a sports wave that made everyone sporting in a recreational manner. Since the early 1990s, a second sports wave emerged. The value of being healthy was the main motivator here. Along with these sports waves, more and more people started to run in Flanders. One in five (19% in 2009) runs at least once a year while this percentage was only 5% in 1999 (Breedveld, Scheerders & Borgers, 2015). Currently a third wave is taking place - namely one where other experiences are important apart from running. Examples are extreme races such as survival runs or festivals such as the color runs. In general, the amount of running events stagnates while the amount of participating competitors only increases. 626 Flemish running races registered more than finishers in This shows the popularity of mass running events. The 20km door Brussel for example is a widely known event with more than participants in the year 2013 ( 20 km door Brussel, 2014). Obviously, also workers began to run. Next to its positive health effects, the activity is appealing for them because of the flexibility and simple accessibility of the sport. Workers can run at any suitable time or place. It can be done easily between other appointments and they do not need time-consuming transport. Other advantages of the running sport are the low cost, that there is no need to become a member of a club and that it is very efficient. Runners can become a high return in a limited time range. To end, even relations with productivity gains and increase in earnings are found (Lechner, 2015). Remarkable is that of all the Flemish runners, 42% has a certificate of higher education towards 29% of the entire population (Breedveld, Scheerders & Borgers, 2015). 23