Thomas W. Britt

This study examined gender bias among female leaders in an organization with high levels of masculine norms: the U.S. military. Leadership experiences related to gender bias were assessed among mid to senior-level female military officers. In addition, the study examined the strategies used by these officers to navigate leadership challenges in a male-dominated profession. The goal was to document the different types of bias experienced and how experiences of gender bias were addressed. Focusing on gender stereotypes and gendered organizational structures as key barriers, we analyzed qualitative responses to open-ended questions to investigate experiences of women in the U.S. military who had advanced to mid- and senior-level leadership positions despite these obstacles. Participants (N = 36) were field-grade officers holding the ranks of Major (N = 12), Lieutenant Colonel (N = 20), or Colonel (N = 4), representing various branches and specialties. Consensual Qualitative Research (CQR) analysis revealed ten domains, with the three most frequent being bias in professional settings, negative interpersonal behaviors, and the application of gender stereotypes. Additionally, participants described employing active coping strategies such as working harder to counteract stereotypes and managing impressions to reduce bias. Finally, participants reported some positive changes in the experience of gender bias over time. These findings underscore the need for further research on the consequences of gender bias for female military leaders and its broader impact on military unit operations and effectiveness.

Background: Organizational trust has been examined as an expectation that leaders will follow through with promises and act consistently with expectations. Most of this research has involved employee samples in traditional low-risk occupations. Aims: To examine leader trust behaviours as predictors of multiple indices of functioning, including depression symptoms, symptoms of alcohol misuse, perceived mission readiness and flourishing, in the high-risk occupation of the military. Methods: Assessed a large cross-sectional sample of infantry soldiers (N = 6384) in garrison who provided responses to a survey assessment. Leader trust behaviours were assessed as the primary predictor. Depression symptoms, alcohol misuse symptoms, perceived mission readiness and flourishing were assessed as outcomes. Ordinary least squares multiple linear regressions were used to examine the relationships between the predictor and outcome variables. Results: The linear regressions revealed that after controlling for covariates, leader trust behaviours predicted fewer depression symptoms (B = −0.16, P < 0.001, 95% CI = −0.19 to −0.13), higher perceived mission readiness (B = 0.39, P < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.34) and higher flourishing (B = 0.28, P < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.24 to 0.32). Leader trust behaviours did not significantly predict alcohol misuse symptoms. Conclusions: Leader trust behaviours emerged as a predictor of multiple indices of functioning in the high-risk occupation of infantry soldiers, even after controlling for general leadership and workplace stressors. Leader development focused on the importance of establishing trust in subordinates through specific behaviours could improve outcomes for employees in high-risk occupations.

Emergency medicine clinicians (EMCs) experience high levels of burnout and mental health strain as a function of the work demands they encounter. The present study examined meaningful work as a buffer of the relationship between work demands and measures of burnout and mental health strain, with the prediction that higher levels of meaningful work would protect EMCs from high levels of work demands. This study offers a longitudinal examination of these relationships in a sample of 113 emergency medicine registered nurses, physicians, residents, and advanced practice providers during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Participants completed an online survey containing measures of work‐related demands, meaningful work, burnout, and mental health strain at Time 1 and then completed the same survey 2 months later at Time 2. Work demands at Time 1 were correlated with burnout and mental health strain at Time 2. Meaningful work at Time 1 correlated negatively with burnout and mental health strain at Time 2. Moderated multiple regression tests revealed that meaningful work at Time 1 moderated the relationship between work demands at Time 1 and burnout at Time 2, such that the relationship between work demands and burnout was not significant for EMCs reporting average or high meaningful work. Moderate to high levels of meaningful work at Time 1 substantially reduced the impact of work demands on EMCs 2 months later. Results suggest that interventions should be explored to enhance meaningful work, thereby reducing the negative effects of work demands on burnout and mental health strain.

Emergency medicine clinicians face disproportionately high levels of burnout and mental health strain compared to other specialties. This study examined whether perceived resilience predicted reduced mental health strain following the COVID-19 Omicron surge and whether meaningful work mediated this relationship. Participants were 197 emergency medicine professionals at a large hospital system who completed monthly surveys during the pandemic. Perceived resilience and meaningful work were measured pre-Omicron surge, and mental health strain was measured post-surge. Results showed that higher perceived resilience significantly predicted lower mental health strain and that meaningful work explained 40% of this relationship. The findings emphasize that resilience matters and that its benefits are at least partly a function of meaningful work. Broader implications extend to organizations seeking to strengthen workforce well-being. Interventions should integrate resilience-building with practices that enhance purpose and meaning at work.

Background: Attorneys often report high levels of stress and mental health concerns. Research on the determinants of whether attorneys seek treatment for mental health problems is sparse. Aims: We examined workplace factors that correlate with mental health symptoms and treatment barriers, and how these workplace factors and personal/attitudinal factors related to mental health treatment seeking. Methods: An online survey was distributed to U.S. attorneys through professional organizations. Validated measures assessed work experiences, health, and treatment-seeking attitudes and behaviours. Results: In total, 283 attorneys responded to the survey. Work overload, stress-related stigma, and psychosocial safety climate correlated with mental health symptoms and barriers/facilitators of treatment seeking. A total of 182 attorneys were identified as having a current mental health concern; 92 had sought treatment within the past year. Those who had sought treatment (compared to those who had not) reported less tenure (OR = 0.86, CI 0.76–0.96), negative views of medication (OR = 0.44, CI 0.21–0.94), self-reliance (0.30, CI 0.12–0.73) and more depression/anxiety symptoms (OR = 1.52, CI 1.19–1.94), work overload (OR = 2.02, CI 1.21–3.35), positive treatment attitudes (OR = 4.18, CI 1.49–11.71), and stigma beliefs about others (OR = 6.92, CI 1.86–25.76; likely a statistical suppression effect). Relative weights analysis identified symptom severity, self-reliance, and positive treatment attitudes as the strongest predictors. Conclusions: Workload and work climate impact attorney’s mental health and attitudes about treatment. Attorneys can be supported with a healthy organizational climate and education on treatment benefits and when self-reliance is insufficient.

Although multilevel theoretical frameworks for team and organizational resilience have increased in recent years, much less empirical research has examined how perceived resilience at multiple levels is related to employee health outcomes. Team resilience was conceptualized as a specific belief that the team is able to adapt well under adverse circumstances. The present study leveraged a unique dataset to examine how team resilience and work stress were related to indices of occupational health among U.S. Navy sailors (N = 10,546) embedded within departments (N = 725) that were embedded within ships (N = 101). Job stress and team resilience at the individual, department, and ship levels predicted individual physical and mental health outcomes. In addition, team resilience interacted with job stress to predict at least one health outcome at all three levels of analysis. Contextual effects also revealed that poor mental and physical health days were lower when sailors were embedded in departments reporting high team resilience. A cross-level interaction was also observed, where department-level team resilience reduced the magnitude of the individual-level relationship between job stress and mental health risk. Implications of the findings for a multilevel approach to resilience and occupational health are discussed.

Introduction: Military relocations represent an opportunity for growth and a potential risk in terms of psychological adjustment. Although relocation is common in the military, little research has examined associated risk and protective factors. This study examined relocation stressors and facilitators and how they related to 3 forms of adjustment: loneliness, perceived stress, and work satisfaction. Since the first relocation experience may be particularly challenging, this study also compared relocation stressors and facilitators between soldiers arriving at their first duty station and those with previous relocation experience. Materials and Methods: Active duty soldiers (n = 242) at 2 U.S. military installations participated in an anonymous survey on military relocation. Relocation risk and protective factors were assessed using the Relocation Stressor Scale and the Relocation Facilitator Scale developed for this study. Primary outcomes included loneliness, perceived stress, and work satisfaction. To examine the extent to which the relocation stressor and facilitator scales predicted adjustment outcomes, hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted accounting for rank, marital status, having children, and first duty station. Results: Over half of participants rated relocation stressors related to affordable housing, loss of social support, moving logistics, and adjustment of the soldier’s family and spouse as at least “somewhat stressful.” Regarding relocation facilitators, a majority agreed that leaders and unit members were helpful after relocation. However, less than half reported that leaders and unit members were welcoming before relocation and only 1 in 3 reported their sponsor was helpful. Relocation stressors predicted more loneliness, more perceived stress, and less work satisfaction after adjusting for rank, marital status, having children, and first duty station. Likewise, relocation facilitators predicted less loneliness, less perceived stress, and more work satisfaction, after adjusting for the same demographics. Soldiers at their first duty station of assignment also reported higher levels of relocation stressors than those with prior relocation experience (P < .001); there was no difference between these 2 groups in terms of relocation facilitators (P = .297). Discussion: The findings offer insight into relocation stressors and facilitators and suggest the need to consider the stress of relocation from both a practical standpoint and an emotional one. Since the association between relocation variables and adjustment was evident even after accounting for rank, marital status, children, and first duty station, the results also suggest that intervening to address relocation stressors and enhance the level of relocation facilitators is important regardless of a soldier’s specific demographics. Nonetheless, soldiers experiencing their first relocation may understandably require more support in addressing their relocation stressors. While limited by cross-sectional self-report data from only 2 military posts, this study produced the first military Relocation Stressor Scale and Relocation Facilitator Scale. Taken together, results suggest steps that leaders, unit members, and the organization can take to help incoming soldiers better adjust to their new unit.