@article{UrbachWeigelt2019,
  author    = {Urbach, Tina and Weigelt, Oliver},
  title     = {Time pressure and proactive work behaviour: A week-level study on intraindividual fluctuations and reciprocal relationships},
  series = {Journal of occupational and organizational psychology},
  volume    = {92},
  journal   = {Journal of occupational and organizational psychology},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Wiley},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {0963-1798},
  doi       = {10.1111/joop.12269},
  pages     = {931 -- 952},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Recent research on proactive work behaviours (PWBs) pointed out that these behaviours can have negative consequences for the proactive individual. We add to this perspective by showing that PWBs may be a source of strain at work and result in elevated time pressure. Challenging the view of time pressure as a challenge stressor, we hypothesize that over the course of work weeks, time pressure will result in less (rather than more) PWB. We investigate these reciprocal effects as within-person, week-level fluctuations of time pressure and PWB based on experience sampling data (N = 52 participants, k = 274 observations). Over the course of three consecutive work weeks, results show a positive lagged effect of PWB in the first week on experiencing time pressure in the second week; in turn, time pressure in the second week had a negative lagged effect on PWB in the third week. Results further suggest that PWB is lowest in work weeks of low time pressure when following a week of high time pressure, indicating a conservation of resources interpretation of the results.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{MazzaJacobDammhahnetal.2019,
  author    = {Mazza, Valeria and Jacob, Jens and Dammhahn, Melanie and Zaccaroni, Marco and Eccard, Jana},
  title     = {Individual variation in cognitive style reflects foraging and antipredator strategies in a small mammal},
  series = {Scientific Reports},
  volume    = {9},
  journal   = {Scientific Reports},
  publisher = {Macmillan Publishers Limited, part of Springer Nature},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {2045-2322},
  doi       = {10.1038/s41598-019-46582-1},
  pages     = {9},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Balancing foraging gain and predation risk is a fundamental trade-off in the life of animals. Individual strategies to acquire, process, store and use information to solve cognitive tasks are likely to affect speed and flexibility of learning, and ecologically relevant decisions regarding foraging and predation risk. Theory suggests a functional link between individual variation in cognitive style and behaviour (animal personality) via speed-accuracy and risk-reward trade-offs. We tested whether cognitive style and personality affect risk-reward trade-off decisions posed by foraging and predation risk. We exposed 21 bank voles (Myodes glareolus) that were bold, fast learning and inflexible and 18 voles that were shy, slow learning and flexible to outdoor enclosures with different risk levels at two food patches. We quantified individual food patch exploitation, foraging and vigilance behaviour. Although both types responded to risk, fast animals increasingly exploited both food patches, gaining access to more food and spending less time searching and exercising vigilance. Slow animals progressively avoided high-risk areas, concentrating foraging effort in the low-risk one, and devoting >50\% of visit to vigilance. These patterns indicate that individual differences in cognitive style/personality are reflected in foraging and anti-predator decisions that underlie the individual risk-reward bias.},
  language  = {en}
}