| Literature DB >> 35693514 |
Philip Teng Lin1, Thinh Truong Vu2, Van Phuong Nguyen3, Qi Wu4.
Abstract
This study investigates the influence of self-determination motivations on accountant employees' psychological wellbeing with the mediating role of positive affectivity and the moderating role of psychological safety. Multivariate analysis and structural equation modeling are used to analyze a three-way time-lagged sample data of 391 accountant employees. Results indicate that positive affectivity positively mediates the relationship between extrinsic motivation and psychological wellbeing and between intrinsic motivation and psychological wellbeing. Furthermore, psychological safety positively moderates the relationship between extrinsic motivation and positive affectivity and between intrinsic motivation and positive affectivity. In addition, psychological safety also positively moderates the relationship between positive affectivity and psychological wellbeing. The findings of this study provide implications for researchers and business managers in managing and enhancing accountant employees' psychological wellbeing.Entities:
Keywords: accountant employees; positive affectivity; psychological safety; psychological wellbeing; self-determination theory
Year: 2022 PMID: 35693514 PMCID: PMC9174744 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.870771
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Literature review of antecedents of psychological wellbeing.
| Studies | Antecedents | Mediator/moderator | Sample |
|
| Psychological interventions | None | Meta-analysis of 223 papers |
|
| Personality | None | Meta-analysis of 334 papers |
|
| Digital media use | Gender | 221,096 adolescents in the United States and United Kingdom |
|
| Self-disclosure on social media | Perceived connectedness, social support, motivations | None |
|
| Human resource practices | Leader-member exchange, social connectedness | 419 employees and 162 leaders in Australia |
|
| Transformational leadership | None | Review of 40 papers |
|
| Human resource practices | None | Case study of 8 social services NPS in the United Kingdom. |
|
| Human resource management | None | None |
|
| Employment conditions | None | 1,653 respondents from households in Australia |
|
| High performance work system | Perceptions fairness | 187 employees in Ireland |
|
| High performance work system | None | 451 employees and 50 managers of 50 firms in Taiwan |
|
| High performance work system | Employee-employer exchange relationship | 297 clinicians in Greek |
|
| Customer incivility | Meaningful work, perspective taking, transformational leadership | 215 employees from service industry in Canada |
|
| Performance management practices | None | 140 nurses in hospitals in Belgium |
|
| High involvement work processes | None | 928 employees from Australia and New Zealand |
|
| Job characteristics | Work-to-family enrichment | 1,390 employees from Portuguese bank |
|
| Innovative human resource management | None | In-depth interviews of 46 employees |
|
| Human resource practices | Employer trust | 613 employees and managers in service firms in the United Kingdom |
|
| High involvement management practices | None | 3,755 employees in Finland |
|
| Transformational leadership | Trust in leadership | 705 employees from telecommunication firms in Canada |
n = 20.
FIGURE 1Research model.
Results of the measurement model.
| Construct | Item | Factor loadings | CR | AVE | Cronbach’s α | Mean | SD |
| Extrinsic motivation (ExtM) | ExtM1 | 0.729 | 0.82 | 0.53 | 0.71 | 3.85 | 0.60 |
| ExtM2 | 0.757 | ||||||
| ExtM3 | 0.708 | ||||||
| ExtM4 | 0.708 | ||||||
| Intrinsic motivation (IntM) | IntM1 | 0.827 | 0.89 | 0.58 | 0.79 | 3.88 | 0.62 |
| IntM2 | 0.683 | ||||||
| IntM3 | 0.753 | ||||||
| IntM4 | 0.708 | ||||||
| IntM5 | 0.767 | ||||||
| IntM6 | 0.808 | ||||||
| Positive affectivity (PosA) | PosA1 | 0.735 | 0.84 | 0.56 | 0.71 | 3.44 | 0.65 |
| PosA2 | 0.754 | ||||||
| PosA3 | 0.755 | ||||||
| PosA4 | 0.762 | ||||||
| Psychological safety (PsyS) | PsyS1 | 0.785 | 0.86 | 0.55 | 0.77 | 3.54 | 0.64 |
| PsyS2 | 0.791 | ||||||
| PsyS3 | 0.760 | ||||||
| PsyS4 | 0.734 | ||||||
| PsyS5 | 0.621 | ||||||
| Psychological wellbeing (Well) | Well1 | 0.746 | 0.84 | 0.52 | 0.83 | 3.73 | 0.61 |
| Well2 | 0.720 | ||||||
| Well3 | 0.715 | ||||||
| Well4 | 0.751 | ||||||
| Well5 | 0.673 |
n = 391, ***p < 0.001.
Discriminant validity.
| Variable | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | VIF |
| (1) Extrinsic motivation |
| 1.756 | ||||
| (2) Intrinsic motivation | 0.53 |
| 1.396 | |||
| (3) Positive affectivity | 0.48 | 0.29 |
| 1.488 | ||
| (4) Psychological safety | 0.42 | 0.22 | 0.48 |
| 1.384 | |
| (5) Psychological wellbeing | 0.44 | 0.42 | 0.46 | 0.27 |
| |
| (6) Social desirability | 0.01 | −0.09 | −0.07 | 0.03 | 0.12 |
n = 391, **p < 0.01, the bold values are square roots of AVE, the brackets are HTMT.
FIGURE 2Hypothesis testing. n = 391, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.