Love, P E D; Edwards, D J and Irani, Z (2010) Work stress, support, and mental health in construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(6), pp. 650-658. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Construction professionals are subjected to a plethora of occupational demands that can have a negative effect on their psychological wellbeing. Such demands can have an adverse influence on individual and organizational performance. To investigate the nature of self and social supports and mental health among construction professionals, an exploratory study was undertaken using the Stress and Mental Health Survey. The survey was distributed to construction professionals throughout Australia and 449 responses were received. Analysis revealed that those working for a contracting organization on-site reported higher levels of poor mental health and greater work stress than consultants. Those working on-site also experienced greater levels of self-stress, whereas consultants reported higher levels of self and work support. Work support was a significant predictor of poor mental health for consultants. Good health, however, was predicted by self, situational, and work support, whereas those working for a contractor only self-support predicated good mental health. It is concluded that while supports are essential in the fostering of good mental health, the absence of these supports can have a significant impact on poor mental health.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Australia; mental health; social support; stress |
| Index terms: | contracting organization, well-being, survey, exploratory study, work stress, mental health, construction professional, organizational performance, Australia |
| Subjects: | health conditions and diseases, Geography, professional development, performance measurement, research methods, psychology, practitioner, data collection methods, mental health and wellbeing |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here