Role ambiguity as an amplifier of the association between job stressors and workers’ psychological ill-being: Evidence from an occupational survey in Japan

Abstract

Objectives: We aim to examine the extent to which role ambiguity modifies the association between job stressors and workers’ psychological ill-being.

Methods: We used data from 41 962 observations from 13 811 individuals (10 269 males and 3542 females) who participated in three to eight waves of an occupational survey conducted in Japan. We estimated fixed-effects models to explain psychological distress (defined by Kessler 6 score ≥13) by role ambiguity. Four types of job stressors (i.e., high job demands, low job control, high effort, and low reward), and their interactions were examined along with potential confounders. We repeated a similar analysis for job dissatisfaction.

Results: The fixed-effects models showed that role ambiguity as well as the four job stressors were positively associated with psychological distress, albeit somewhat more modestly than the results of the pooled cross-sectional models. More notably, we found that role ambiguity substantially amplified the association between job stressors and psychological distress; for example, a combination of high job demands and high role ambiguity added to the risk of psychological distress by 3.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.5%-4.5%), compared with 1.4% (95% CI: 0.4%-2.3%) for a combination of high job demands and low role ambiguity. In contrast, we did not find a modifying effect of role ambiguity on the association between low job control and psychological distress. Similar results were observed for job dissatisfaction.

Conclusion: The results underscore the importance of reducing role ambiguity to mitigate the adverse impact of job stressors on workers’ psychological ill-being.