Psychosocial Hazards at Work: Organizational Stressors, Interpersonal Exposures, and Mental Health across U.S. Working Populations

Abstract

Mental disorders, such as depression and anxiety, are leading causes of disability among working adults worldwide. Psychosocial hazards at work are increasingly recognized as modifiable determinants of worker mental health, with interpersonal exposures including bullying, harassment, and violence among the most strongly associated with adverse mental health outcomes. Herein, we present three studies examining occupational psychosocial hazards as they relate to mental health and intermediate psychosocial stressors across U.S. working populations, with two studies focused on U.S. mariners and a third extending to the broader workforce.First, we conducted a content analysis of open-ended survey responses from U.S. mariners (n = 478) during the COVID-19 pandemic to characterize worker-identified stressors and solutions. Inadequate shoreside support was the most frequently identified stressor (12.3%), followed by inability to deboard (10.2%) and ineffective or unnecessary controls (9.9%). Female mariners more frequently reported economic uncertainty and inability to deboard as stressors, while younger mariners more frequently reported extended voyages as a stressor. Overall, the findings suggest a need for equitable application of emergency protocols, processes to preserve shore leave, consistent communication between shoreside employers and vessels, and mechanisms to address workforce wellbeing through compensation and recognition. Next, we used latent profile analysis to characterize the interpersonal work environment among U.S. mariners (n = 422) and tested its associations with mental health and intent to leave the maritime industry. Three profiles emerged: Supportive (64.2%), Isolating (19.4%), and Hostile (16.5%). Compared to the Supportive profile, the Hostile profile was associated with 5.62-fold higher odds of likely depression (95% CI: 2.76, 11.43) and 4.81-fold higher odds of likely anxiety (95% CI: 2.38, 9.72), while the Isolating profile was associated with 2.77-fold higher odds of likely depression (95% CI: 1.45, 5.28) and 3.36-fold higher odds of likely anxiety (95% CI: 1.79, 6.32). After adjustment for job satisfaction and mental health, the observed association between profile membership and intent to leave was attenuated to nonsignificance. Finally, using linked 2023 National Health Interview Survey and Occupational Information Network data, we examined whether occupation-level exposure to unpleasant or violent contact in the workplace was associated with experiences of discrimination and heightened vigilance among full-time U.S. workers (n = 12,462). Exposure to violent contact was associated with higher vigilance (β = 0.076; 95% CI: 0.013, 0.140) but not discrimination, while exposure to unpleasant contact was not associated with either outcome. Women, Black, and sexual minority workers were each overrepresented in occupations exposed to violent contact. The work presented here characterizes psychosocial hazards in U.S. working populations and identifies intervention points for protecting worker mental health and retention. Across these studies, the interpersonal work environment emerged as a source of both harmful exposures (eg, bullying) and protective ones (eg, peer support) at the occupational level, while individual characteristics were simultaneously strongly associated with the outcomes under study. Therefore, addressing interpersonal exposures requires intervention at multiple levels. For mariners, this means reducing the conditions that produce hostile climates through adequate crewing and leadership accountability, while building supportive climates through team building and structured peer support. For the broader workforce, it means combining organizational design and policy for violence prevention with crisis debriefing and de-escalation support. These findings strengthen the case for a federal workplace-violence prevention standard for general industry.