Nomological Network of a Challenge and Hindrance Workplace Stressors Scale: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract

This research presents a meta-analysis that aims to assess the reliability and nomological network of the Cavanaugh, Boswell, Roehling, and Boudreau (2000) measure of challenge and hindrance workplace stressors, specifically, the relationship of these stressors with correlates and outcomes. Since the publication of this seminal article in 2000, the measurement of challenge and hindrance workplace stressors within industrial/organizational psychology has been vast. Yet, how the Cavanaugh and colleagues’ (2000) scale operates and performs in the field has not be reviewed. Therefore, the following meta-analysis examines challenge and hindrance workplace stressors as operationalized by Cavanaugh and colleagues (2000) to provide a greater understanding of this scale. By investigating this scale, (1) information was ascertained about the average reliability of this scale within research, (2) average effect sizes and variabilities in effect sizes were analyzed between challenge and hindrance stressors and correlates/outcomes, and (3) possible moderators between stressors and correlates/outcomes were explored. Pertinent information from articles was extrapolated that met the inclusion criteria (i.e., use the Cavanaugh et al. 2000 measure, published in English, have correlational data) and analyzed those articles using Hunter and Schmidt’s (2004) meta-analytic method to determine the sample size weighted mean observed correlations and the reliability-corrected mean correlations and variability. Results suggest the Cavanaugh and colleagues (2000) measure has a relatively high reliability (alpha= 0.85 for both challenge stressors and hindrance stressors) and that most correlates and outcomes are not differentially related to challenge and hindrance workplace stressors.