Please wait a minute...
心理学报  2017, Vol. 49 Issue (11): 1449-1459    DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.01449
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
 破解“通勤悖论”:通勤时间如何影响幸福感
 吴伟炯
 (浙江财经大学工商管理学院, 杭州 310018)
 Resolving “Commuting Paradox”: How commute time influences subjective well-being
 WU Weijiong
 (Business Administration College, Zhejiang University of Finance & Economics, Hangzhou 310018 China)
全文: PDF(626 KB)   评审附件 (1 KB) 
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)       背景资料
文章导读  
摘要  本文从社会过渡带和心理过渡带两个方面对“通勤悖论”进行解析, 构建了通勤时间影响幸福感的理论模型。通过对广州市白领的追踪调查和多项式回归分析, 结果发现:(1)婚姻状态(社会过渡带)具有调节作用, 未婚员工通勤时间负向影响生活满意度, 已婚员工通勤时间对生活满意度和快乐度有曲线影响; (2)恢复体验(心理过渡带)具有交互效应, 心理解脱调节了未婚员工通勤时间与通勤效用的关系, 放松体验调节了未婚员工通勤时间与快乐度的关系; (3)已婚员工通勤时间与通勤效用和快乐度的关系受放松体验调节, 与生活满意度的关系受心理解脱调节; (4)通勤时间对生活满意度和快乐度的影响, 以及婚姻状态和恢复体验的交互效应, 以通勤效用为中介; (5)员工在“通勤时间陷阱” (1.75~2.75小时)的效用均衡。结论有助于分析“通勤悖论”的深层原因, 对城市管理、企业管理和个人都具有积极启示。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
吴伟炯
关键词  通勤悖论 幸福感 通勤时间 恢复体验 通勤过渡带    
Abstract: People in today’s society spend a substantial amount of their time traveling to and from work. Researchers have rightfully concerned themselves with the question of if and how commuting affects people’s lives. Some behavioral economists suggested that commute time play a negative effect on individuals’ life satisfaction. This phenomenon is called “commuting paradox”, in which individuals’ utility are imbalance due to longer commuting time is not compensated. The present study regards commute time as the work-family transition zone, such as social transition zone and psychological transition zone. With these perspectives, we aimed to examine the moderating roles that marital status (social transition zone) and recovery experiences (psychological transition zone) play in the relationship between commute time and subjective well-being. What is more, the mediating mechanism of commuting utility was explored. In order to test our model, we conducted a survey on 822 part-time graduates from three colleges. Data were collected from 3 follow-up surveys to avoid the common method bias. Participants were asked to fill out questionnaires at three time points (Time 1: commute time, marital status and recovery experiences; Time 2: commuting utility; and Time 3: satisfaction with life, happiness). These variables were assessed by: commute time survey, marital status survey, recovery experiences questionnaire, satisfaction with life scale, PANA scale, and Princeton affect and time survey. All Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were acceptable (ranging from 0.83 to 0.91). Descriptive statistics and hierarchical polynomial regression analysis were applied to test the hypotheses. The results indicated that: (1) marital status (social transition zone) moderated effects of commute time on subjective well-being, i.e., unmarried employees’ commute time had negative impact on life satisfaction, married employees’ commuting time had U shape impact on life satisfaction, happiness and occupational well-being; (2) recovery experiences during work→home commute (psychological transition zone) moderated effects of commute time on outcome variables, i.e., psychological detachment moderated relationships between unmarried employees’ commute time and commuting utility; relax experience moderated the relationship between unmarried employees’ commute time and happiness; (3) effects of married employees’ commute time on commuting utility and happiness were moderated by relax experience, whereas the relationship between married employees’ commute time and life satisfaction were moderated by psychological detachment; (4) commuting utility not only mediated the effects of commute time on life satisfaction and happiness, but also mediated the moderations of marital status and recover experiences; (5) employees’ utility equilibrium were found during “commuting time trap” (1.75 h - 2.75 h), in which longer commuting time was compensated. Significance: The present study analyzed the commuting paradox from two aspects, including social transition zone and psychological transition zone. Then we built a theoretical model regarding how commute time influences employee’s subjective well-being. Together, our findings contribute to the literature by helping to (a) provided a psychological explanation for commuting paradox, (b) integrate commuting utility, life satisfaction and happiness, (c) resolve mixed findings regarding the issue of commute time and subjective well-being. The managerial implications of our findings, limitations, as well as future research directions were discussed.
Key wordscommuting paradox    subjective well-being    commute time    recovery experience    commuting transition zone.
收稿日期: 2016-11-03      出版日期: 2017-09-25
ZTFLH:     
  B849:C91  
基金资助: 浙江省自然科学基金青年项目(LQ16G010003)、浙江省社会科学界联合会研究课题(2018Z14)、中国博士后科学基金项目(2015M581912)。
通讯作者: 吴伟炯, E-mail: psyjohn@foxmail.com     E-mail: E-mail: psyjohn@foxmail.com
引用本文:   
吴伟炯.  破解“通勤悖论”:通勤时间如何影响幸福感[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(11): 1449-1459.
WU Weijiong.  Resolving “Commuting Paradox”: How commute time influences subjective well-being. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(11): 1449-1459.
链接本文:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.01449      或      http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/Y2017/V49/I11/1449
[1] 张奇林;周艺梦. 中国城镇低龄退休老年人工作与幸福感的关系[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(4): 472-481.
[2] 程垦, 林英晖.  组织支持一致性与新生代员工离职意愿: 员工幸福感的中介作用[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(12): 1570-1580.
[3] 黄婷婷; 刘莉倩;王大华;张文海. 经济地位和计量地位:社会地位比较对主观幸福感的影响及其年龄差异[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(9): 1163-1174.
[4] 郑晓明; 刘鑫. 互动公平对员工幸福感的影响:心理授权的中介作用与权力距离的调节作用[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(6): 693-709.
[5] 马红宇;谢菊兰;唐汉瑛;申传刚;张晓翔. 工作性通信工具使用与双职工夫妻的幸福感:基于溢出?交叉效应的分析[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(1): 48-58.
[6] 杨晶晶;Ariela LOWENSTEIN;Todd JACKSON;郑涌. 代际团结潜在类别与关系质量对自陈健康及幸福感的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2013, 45(7): 811-824 .
[7] 刘霞;赵景欣;申继亮. 歧视知觉对城市流动儿童幸福感的影响:中介机制及归属需要的调节作用[J]. 心理学报, 2013, 45(5): 568-584.
[8] 唐淦琦,黄敏儿. 高低幸福感人群的负情绪特点:生理和表情的依据[J]. 心理学报, 2012, 44(8): 1086-1099.
[9] 曾红,郭斯萍. “乐”——中国人的主观幸福感与传统文化中的幸福观[J]. 心理学报, 2012, 44(7): 986-994.
[10] 吴伟炯;刘毅;路红;谢雪贤. 本土心理资本与职业幸福感的关系[J]. 心理学报, 2012, 44(10): 1349-1370.
[11] 蔡华俭,黄玄凤,宋海荣. 性别角色和主观幸福感的关系模型:基于中国大学生的检验[J]. 心理学报, 2008, 40(04): 474-486.
[12] 冯冬冬, 陆昌勤,萧爱铃. 工作不安全感与幸福感、绩效的关系:自我效能感的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2008, 40(04): 448-455.
[13] 陈作松,季浏. 身体锻炼对高中学生主观幸福感的影响及其心理机制 [J]. 心理学报, 2006, 38(04): 562-575.
[14] 王大华,佟雁,周丽清,申继亮. 亲子支持对老年人主观幸福感的影响机制[J]. 心理学报, 2004, 36(01): 78-82.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《心理学报》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发  技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn