Human energy and social breaks

Quinn et al (2012) stated that human energy can be categorized in two ways: physical energy and energetic activation. Physical energy according to Quinn et al (2012) is the action or capacity to engage in action or out of action and are feelings of the physical body fatigue, where energetic activation is the feeling of being depleted and tired cognitively (Michielsen et al, 2003). ten Brummelhuis & Bakker (2012a) state energy as a limited resource which is dynamic in nature showing signs of fluctuation among and within the individual. Cole et al, (2012) identified two components of energy; high energy or activation, and low energy or the lack of activation with high energy and low energy being classified by Fritz et al (2011) as being related but distinct components of the energy construct and have unique antecedents, fluctuations, and outcomes (Mäkikangas et al, 2012). Cole et al (2012) also mentions that human energy is a dynamic affective experience that entails having psycho-physiological resources to act with research shown that individuals may recover their energy by engaging in activities associated with experiences of psychological detachment, mastery, and relaxation (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007; Sonnentag, Kuttler, & Fritz, 2010). One way to improve the recovery is through the concept of energy management strategies, which refers to activities that an individual engages within in the attempt to replenish and increase their energy while performing a task, be this short or long. Trougakos & Hideg (2009) conducted research on specific and short respite activities and distinguished between two distinct categories of energy management strategies. The first strategy Trougakos & Hideg (2009) identified was those strategies and techniques that individuals use while conducting a task in which to manage their energy, for example, switching tasks, browsing the internet/social media or, making a to-do list (Fritz et al, 2011). A Second strategy that was identified was using micro-breaks, these are not related to the activity but are predetermined rest periods, for example having a snack, doing some form of physical activity and socialising with other people (Fritz et al., 2011; Trougakos & Hideg, 2009). Interestingly, Fritz et al. (2011) suggested that individuals may only seek out an energy management strategy when the individual is already fatigued. However micro breaks are just a fraction of the timed breaks with Sluiter et al (2000) mentioning that within all recovery literatures, there are four-time distinctions: macrorecovery, metarecovery, mesorecovery, and microrecovery Sluiter et al (2000) states that macrorecovery involves respite periods longer than two days, metarecovery periods range from one hour to two days, mesorecovery ranges from ten minutes to one hour, and microbreaks, are short non-work periods lasting ten minutes or less. This them makes research and investigation on energy management strategies something that can be used to impact protocol to reduce fatigue of the individual while being occupied within an activity. Along with the feelings of high energy can be seen as an overall approach-oriented behaviour system and can direct individuals towards the procurement of resources (Shirom, 2004). Research has indicated that individuals with higher levels of energy are rated as performing better by those who witness them (Carmeli et al, 2009) with Ford et al (2011) conducting a meta-analysis and reported that energy outcomes have a moderate to strong relationship with individual performing the task. In addition to the findings by Carmeli et al, 2009) and Ford et al (2011), Armon et al (NA) conducted a longitudinal study over three years found that individual feelings of high energy are related to better health outcomes. In education the study of low energy has been examined more frequently (Sonnentag et al., 2011), and has been described feelings of fatigue (McNair et al, 1971), exhaustion (Demerouti et al, 2001), tiredness (Watson & Clark, 1999), or feeling used up (Maslach et al, 2001) and is considered an antecedent of withdraw oriented behaviours (Shirom, 2004) in opposition high energy research has been measured as higher vitality ( Ryan & Deci, 2000), higher vigor (Shirom, 2004), positive activation (Watson & Clark, 1999), improved arousal (Thayer, 1986), and being more alert (McNair et al, 1971). Within human energy research the act of having a break has been differentiated between four categories: cognitive, nutrition-intake, relaxation, and social activities (Kim et al., 2018). One activity that lack research is that of social activities that involve socializing with other in others on non-task -related matters with a stog enforces on face-to-face communication. Fritz et al. (2013) suggests that activities that build social relationships may be one of the most advantageous break strategies for energy management within any environment. According to Owens et al (2016) social interactions can provide relational energy which can increase engagement and productivity. Current findings by Geldart et al (2018) suggest that voluntary social micro-break activities may have the greatest potential for helping to elevate the fatigue driven by a lack of a break when participating within an activity. This may not be surprising as building social relationships with other people in any has been cited as one of the most powerful predictors of well-being in any environment (Kinnunen et al, 2015). Trougakos & Hideg, 2009) also suggest that social resources may play one of the largest roles in helping individuals to recover from fatigue within the activity as building positive relations can not only decrease the occurrence of fatigue throughout the day but may also provide more resources for momentary recovery when it does occur. However, there is a caution and that is social micro-breaks may also serve as the facilitator of unwanted uncivil experiences and can have negative consequences when social interactions are unwanted or become negative (Trougakos et al., 2014). This email and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential information and are intended solely for the use of the individual named. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender and/or contact the data protection team at dp@chichester.ac.uk immediately. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail and must delete this e-mail from your system.