COGNITIVE REAPPRAISAL AND SELF-EFFICACY IN COMPLEX PROJECT ENVIRONMENTS: IMPLICATIONS FOR EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23235934Ключевые слова:
self-efficacy, employee performance, project management, emotion regulation, complex environments, workplace psychology, cognitive reappraisalАннотация
Complex project environments are characterized by uncertainty, changing requirements, tight deadlines, interpersonal tensions and the need to make decisions under pressure. In such conditions, employee performance is influenced not only by technical knowledge and organizational resources but also by how employees interpret and respond to emotionally demanding situations. This article examines the relationship between cognitive reappraisal, self-efficacy and employee performance in complex project environments. Cognitive reappraisal refers to the process of changing the interpretation of an emotionally challenging situation to influence its emotional impact, whereas self efficacy concerns an individual’s belief in their ability to successfully perform a particular task. Drawing on research in emotion regulation, social cognitive theory and organizational psychology, the article argues that these two psychological resources can complement one another. Cognitive reappraisal may help employees manage emotional reactions to uncertainty and setbacks, while self-efficacy can strengthen persistence, confidence and task engagement. Their combination may therefore be particularly valuable in project environments where employees are required to remain productive despite changing circumstances. The article concludes with several implications for project managers, including psychologically supportive leadership, realistic feedback, reflective practices and training aimed at strengthening both emotional regulation and employees’ confidence in their own capabilities.
Библиографические ссылки
1. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W. H. Freeman.
2. Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 271–299.
3. Gross, J. J. (2002). Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive, and social consequences. Psychophysiology, 39(3), 281–291.
4. Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26(1), 1–26.
5. Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 348–362.
6. Moyal, N., Henik, A., & Anholt, G. E. (2014). Cognitive strategies to regulate emotions—current evidence and future directions. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1019. Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 240–261.
7. Diefendorff, J. M., Niven, K., & Ong, X. W. (2026). Emotion regulation at work: A social perspective. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior.
