Are all challenge stressors beneficial for learning? A meta-analytical assessment of differential effects of workload and cognitive demands

Abstract

Previous meta-analyses showed that challenge stressors are, though stressful, also motivating. However, their hypothesised gains related to learning are less well understood. In addition to the lack of meta-analytical assessments, there are conflicting theoretical perspectives on the learning effects of challenge stressors. In contrast to the challenge–hindrance stressor framework, action regulation theory posits that cognitive demands, but not workload, are conducive to learning. Furthermore, job control, the level of a stressor, and the type of occupation may moderate the effects of these two challenge stressors. Based on 417 independent samples collectively including 319,306 individuals, this meta-analysis tested the associations of workload and cognitive demands with learning, motivation, and strain and examined potential moderation effects. Results showed that workload was negatively related to learning and motivation and positively related to strain. Cognitive demands were positively related to learning and motivation and negatively related to strain. The detrimental effects of workload were more pronounced for care and social worker and for measures of overload. No moderations were found for country-level job control. Taken together, the results cast doubts on whether stressors can actually be simultaneously detrimental and beneficial, as neither workload nor cognitive demands were found to have such a pattern.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 44 citations exist upstream.