Christopher A Magee1,2, Laura D Robinson2, Alisha McGregor1. 1. a School of Psychology, University of Wollongong , Wollongong , Australia. 2. b Department of Health Studies , University of Stavanger , Stavanger, Norway.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This article investigated whether work-to-family conflict (WFC) and work-to-family enrichment (WFE) were associated with employee sleep quality. WFC and WFE reflect the potential for experiences at work to negatively and positively influence nonworking life respectively, and may have implications for sleep quality. In this article, we examined whether WFC and WFE were linked with sleep quality via hedonic balance (i.e., positive affect relative to negative affect). PARTICIPANTS: The sample included 3,170 employed Australian parents involved in the Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey. METHODS: Information on WFC, WFE, hedonic balance, sleep quality, and relevant covariates was collected through a structured interview and self-completion questionnaire. RESULTS: WFC was associated with poorer sleep quality (β = .27, p < .001), and this relationship was stronger in males than females and in dual parent-single income families. WFC was also found to be indirectly associated with poor sleep quality via a lower hedonic balance (β = .17, 99% confidence interval [.14, .20]). WFE was not directly associated with sleep quality, but was indirectly associated with better sleep quality via a higher hedonic balance (β = -.04 [-.07, -.02]). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that aspects of the work-family interface are associated with employee sleep quality. Furthermore, affective experiences were found to link WFC and WFE with sleep quality. Workplace interventions that target WFC and WFE may have implications for employee sleep.
OBJECTIVE: This article investigated whether work-to-family conflict (WFC) and work-to-family enrichment (WFE) were associated with employee sleep quality. WFC and WFE reflect the potential for experiences at work to negatively and positively influence nonworking life respectively, and may have implications for sleep quality. In this article, we examined whether WFC and WFE were linked with sleep quality via hedonic balance (i.e., positive affect relative to negative affect). PARTICIPANTS: The sample included 3,170 employed Australian parents involved in the Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey. METHODS: Information on WFC, WFE, hedonic balance, sleep quality, and relevant covariates was collected through a structured interview and self-completion questionnaire. RESULTS: WFC was associated with poorer sleep quality (β = .27, p < .001), and this relationship was stronger in males than females and in dual parent-single income families. WFC was also found to be indirectly associated with poor sleep quality via a lower hedonic balance (β = .17, 99% confidence interval [.14, .20]). WFE was not directly associated with sleep quality, but was indirectly associated with better sleep quality via a higher hedonic balance (β = -.04 [-.07, -.02]). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that aspects of the work-family interface are associated with employee sleep quality. Furthermore, affective experiences were found to link WFC and WFE with sleep quality. Workplace interventions that target WFC and WFE may have implications for employee sleep.
Authors: Aline Silva-Costa; Susanna Toivanen; Lúcia Rotenberg; Maria Carmen Viana; Maria de Jesus M da Fonseca; Rosane H Griep Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2021-04-21