A Job Demands–Resources Perspective on Emotional Exhaustion and Work Engagement in Human–Animal Work

Prior research has highlighted various psychological benefits and detriments associated with human–animal work, i.e., work that is substantially focused on living animals. However, systematic research that identifies both demands and resources across various occupations in this domain of work has been limited. To address this issue, we build on job demands–resources theory to identify job demands and resources that are characteristic of human–animal work and link them to health and motivational outcomes. Our study of 205 individuals who engage in human–animal work across different occupations shows that in terms of job demands, animal distress positively relates to workers’ emotional exhaustion, but the occupational stigma of human–animal work does not. Regarding job resources, we find that pro-animal impact and human–animal bond both positively relate to work engagement, explaining additional variance in work engagement beyond more general job resources. However, when animal distress is high, human–animal bond does no longer predict work engagement. We discuss implications of our study for job demands–resources theory, research on occupational stigma, and the field of human–animal work.