Cited by 34Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

Problem solving and affect as mechanisms linking daily mindfulness to task performance and job satisfaction

Forjan, Danielle N., Tuckey, Michelle R., Li, Yiqiong·2020·Stress and Health

Abstract

This study investigated the daily relationships between mindfulness and job satisfaction via affect and mindfulness and task performance via problem solving confidence. Participants were 57 full‐time and part‐time employees who completed a baseline survey and five daily diary entries. Data were analysed using multilevel modelling. On days when they experienced greater mindfulness, employees also experienced (a) greater daily job satisfaction via high‐activation positive affect (but not low‐activation positive affect nor negative affect) and (b) greater daily self‐reported task performance via problem solving confidence. Our findings suggest that high‐activation positive affect and problem solving confidence may be important daily mechanisms of mindfulness at work. Growing evidence links mindfulness to work‐related outcomes; however, limited research has investigated the mechanisms involved. The present study is one of the first to collect empirical observations regarding how state mindfulness operates at work on a daily basis, providing support for both affective and cognitive pathways. Advances in this area can underpin a robust theoretical framework to guide the implementation of daily mindfulness practice and interventions targeting specific work‐related outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/smi.2931

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Forjan, D. N., Tuckey, M. R., & Li, Y.
Affiliations
  • University of South Australia (AU)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Tuckey, Michelle R.
Venue
Stress and Health
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-02-19
Volume
36
Issue
3
Pages
338-349
ISSN
  • 1532-2998 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-3005
OpenAlex
W3002781975
Cited by
34
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5
FWCI
1.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Stress and Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
mindfulness, job satisfaction, task performance, problem-solving confidence, positive affect, negative affect, emotional mechanisms, cognitive mechanisms, state mindfulness, daily diary, workers, mindfulness-based interventions
MeSH terms
Adult, Affect, Employment, Female, Humans, Job Satisfaction, Male, Problem Solving, Surveys and Questionnaires, Task Performance and Analysis, Mindfulness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review