Premium
PMS in the workplace: Dispelling the myth of cyclic dysfunction
Author(s) -
Hardie Elizabeth A.
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
journal of occupational and organizational psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.257
H-Index - 114
eISSN - 2044-8325
pISSN - 0963-1798
DOI - 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1997.tb00633.x
Subject(s) - psychology , mythology , social psychology , psychoanalysis , philosophy , theology
To examine the notion that cyclic dysfunction among female employees is a pervasive workplace problem, 438 employees completed a survey of the past week's stress, health and work experiences. A 4 (menstrual cycle status) X 2 (occupational level) analysis showed no differences between groups of perimenstrual women, postmenstrual women, non‐menstruating women, and male colleagues on dimensions of illness, wellness, work performance, absenteeism, or subjective stress; although there were occupational differences in stress, health and work impairment. Women with perceived premenstrual syndrome (PMS) showed no evidence of perimenstrual dysfunction. This group consistently reported high stress, poor health, and work impairment across the menstrual cycle. Employers need not fear cyclic decrements in female employees' productivity; however, self‐diagnosed PMS appears to be linked with persistent health and work problems.