Today's workers around the world are experiencing growing uncertainty about their future employment. Living in the chronic threat to the continuity of their employment (i.e., job insecurity) has adverse consequences. To understand where job insecurity comes from, we take a resources-demands perspective to synthesize and meta-analyze 57 theoretical sources of job insecurity. Using 3-decade (1986-2018) data from 425 independent samples representing 219,190 individuals from 39 countries, we find that the vast majority of theoretical predictors explain meaningful variance in job insecurity. Interestingly, resources (facilitating goal attainment), compared with demands (hindering goal attainment) have stronger relationships with job insecurity. Moreover, individualism, gross domestic product, and egalitarianism at the country level strengthen the negative relationships between resources and job insecurity and attenuate the positive relationships between demands and job insecurity, whereas power distance, national unemployment rate, and income inequality at the country-level lessen the negative relationships between resources and job insecurity and aggravate the positive relationships between demands and job insecurity. Finally, organizational practices account for significantly more variance in qualitative job insecurity than quantitative job insecurity, whereas personal factors and organizational social indicators explain a similar amount of variance in qualitative and quantitative job insecurity. Results suggest that gathering personal and organizational resources is more important than removing demands in terms of reducing job insecurity; having access to more resources in an attempt to diminish job insecurity is especially functional in countries high in individualism, gross domestic product, and egalitarianism, or low in power distance, national unemployment rate, and income inequality. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

解决工作不安全感的资源需求方法：多层次的荟萃分析研究。

当今世界各地的工人在未来的就业中正面临越来越大的不确定性。生活在对其就业连续性的长期威胁（即工作不安全感）中有不利的后果。为了了解工作不安全感的来源，我们从资源需求的角度对57个工作不安全感的理论来源进行综合和荟萃分析。使用来自39个国家/地区的219,190个人的425个独立样本的3年（1986-2018）数据，我们发现绝大多数理论预测因素可以解释工作不安全感的有意义差异。有趣的是，与需求（阻碍实现目标）相比，资源（促进实现目标）与工作不安全感的关系更强。而且，个人主义，国内生产总值，国家一级的平等和平等主义加强了资源与工作不安全感之间的消极关系，削弱了需求与工作不安全感之间的积极关系，而国家一级的权力距离，国民失业率和收入不平等减轻了资源与工作之间的消极关系。不安全感，加剧了需求与工作不安全感之间的积极关系。最后，与定量工作不安全感相比，组织实践在定性工作不安全感中所占的差异要大得多，而个人因素和组织社会指标则说明在定性和定量工作不安全感中所产生的变化量相似。结果表明，就减少工作不安全感而言，收集个人和组织资源比消除需求更为重要。在个人主义，国内生产总值和平均主义较高，权力距离，国民失业率和收入不平等较低的国家，获得更多资源以减少工作不安全感的作用尤其明显。（PsycInfo数据库记录（c）2021 APA，保留所有权利）。