A Longitudinal Test of the Demand–Control Model Using Specific Job Demands and Specific Job Control

# The Author(s) 2010. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Background Supportive studies of the demand–control (DC) model were more likely to measure specific demands combined with a corresponding aspect of control. Purpose A longitudinal test of Karasek’s (Adm Sci Q. 24:285–308, 1) job strain hypothesis including specific measures of job demands and job control, and both selfreport and objectively recorded well-being. Method Job strain hypothesis was tested among 267 health care employees from a two-wave Dutch panel survey with a 2-year time lag. Results Significant demand/control interactions were found for mental and emotional demands, but not for physical demands. The association between job demands and job satisfaction was positive in case of high job control, whereas this association was negative in case of low job control. In addition, the relation between job demands and J. de Jonge (*

Job Resources and Matching Active Coping Styles as Moderators of the Longitudinal Relation Between Job Demands and Job Strain

Background: Only in a few longitudinal studies it has been examined whether job resources should be matched to job demands to show stress-buffering effects of job resources (matching hypothesis), while there are no empirical studies in which the moderating effect of matching personal characteristics on the stress-buffering effect of job resources has been examined. Purpose: In this study, both the matching hypothesis and the moderating effect of matching active coping styles were examined with respect to the longitudinal relation between job demands, job resources, and job strain.Method: The study group consisted of 317 beginning teachers from Belgium. The two-wave survey data with a 1-year time lag were analyzed by means of structural equation modeling and multiple group analyses. Results: Data did not support the matching hypothesis. In addition, no support was found for the moderating effect of specific active coping styles, irrespective of the level of match. Conclusion: To show stress-buffering effects of job resources, it seems to make no difference whether or not specific types of job demands and job resources are matched, and whether or not individual differences in specific active coping styles are taken into account