Search results1 – 7 of 7
This chapter examines the role of stress and emotional well-being as critical antecedents of important outcomes in the military context. In it, we provide a framework for…
This chapter examines the role of stress and emotional well-being as critical antecedents of important outcomes in the military context. In it, we provide a framework for understanding the sources of stress among military personnel. Using this model, we review the risk factors associated with combat and deployment cycles in addition to protective factors, such as personality characteristics and social support, which mitigate the effects of stress on emotional well-being and performance. Finally, we evaluate efforts by military organizations to enhance the emotional well-being of service members through training programs designed to build resiliency.
The relationship between team cohesion and individual well-being is clear. Being part of a highly cohesive team is likely to contribute to the well-being of individual…
The relationship between team cohesion and individual well-being is clear. Being part of a highly cohesive team is likely to contribute to the well-being of individual team members. A multidirectional relationship is likely as individual well-being is also likely to contribute to team cohesion. This chapter examines such critical relationships in the context of team performance. To do so, we draw on the dominant literatures related to these concepts, focusing on two specific types of team cohesion – social cohesion and task cohesion – and two specific types of well-being – subjective well-being (SWB) and psychological well-being (PWB). We contend that social cohesion and SWB are likely to be strongly related, while task cohesion and PWB are likely to share a strong relationship. Therefore, the chapter focuses on the evidence regarding the transactional relationship between social team cohesion and SWB, and transactional relationship between task team cohesion and PWB. Of course, we also recognize the close relationships between social and task cohesion, and between SWB and PWB. We consider the practical implications of studying the relationships between these concepts and put forth a number of recommendations for future research in this area.
Municipalities commonly ask the public to give input by answering questions about their preferences. There is some belief that input enhances the public's confidence in…
Municipalities commonly ask the public to give input by answering questions about their preferences. There is some belief that input enhances the public's confidence in government. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether different types of input activities (obtained by phone or online surveys, or via face‐to‐face engagements) differentially impact confidence.
Data were collected over two years from different input activities undertaken to inform a city's budgeting and performance measures' determinations.
Significant amounts of variance in the public's confidence in municipal governments are accounted for by independent predictors such as current satisfaction, perceived trustworthiness, legitimacy, and loyalty to the institution. Compared to online and phone surveys, face‐to‐face input methods seem to have a particularly strong, positive relationship with the public's perceptions of the trustworthiness (e.g. competence, integrity, benevolence) of municipal government officials. Persons who participate in face‐to‐face, online, or phone events differ both in extent of confidence and, to a small extent, in the bases of their confidence.
The study design is correlational rather than experimental and data were not originally gathered to test the identified hypotheses. In addition, it is not prudent to put too much stock in results from only one jurisdiction that relied primarily on convenience samples.
In instances in which enhancing confidence in the institution is a specific objective of public input, this work provides researchers and practitioners with guidance to better anticipate which input technique(s) works best and why.