Models of Uncertainty: The Integrative Model of Uncertainty Tolerance

The COVID–19 pandemic crisis has intersected organizational life in many ways. The mandatory confinements, the volatile and uncertain social and economic context, the need for social distance, and isolation have undoubtedly impacted individuals’ behaviors at and toward work. All these changes have increased the workers’ perceived uncertainty (Deev & Plíhal, Reference Deev and Plíhal2022).

Uncertainty “is fundamentally a mental state, a subjective, cognitive experience of human beings rather than a feature of the objective, material world. The specific focus of this experience, furthermore, is ignorance—i.e., the lack of knowledge.” (Anderson et al., Reference Anderson, Carleton, Diefenbach and Han2019, p. 2). The experience of uncertainty is triggered by events or situations, perceived as unknown, as the integrative model of uncertainty tolerance (IMUT; Hillen et al., Reference Hillen, Gutheil, Strout, Smets and Han2017) stated. Uncertainty is subjective in nature, as it depends on the way individuals appraise what happens to them. When individuals experience this subjective perception of uncertainty there are some reactions that may co-occur temporally (Dugas et al., Reference Dugas, Gosselin and Ladouceur2001): (a) Cognitive (e.g., appraisals of denial or threat); (b) affective (emotions, such as fear, aversion or despair), or (c) behavioral (e.g., avoidance, inaction, inattention) reactions. The IMUT also highlighted the role of personality aspects (trait or state) as buffers or intensifiers of the relation between perceived uncertainty and its subsequent reactions, suggesting that certain personality traits or dispositions may attenuate (e.g., optimism, resilience) or exacerbate (e.g., neuroticism) the negative impact of uncertainty on negative affective reactions and behaviors.

Complementarily, the theory of uncertainty management (TUM; Brashers, Reference Brashers2001) assumes that uncertainty results from the appraisal to an event in a given environment within which details are ambiguous, complex, unpredictable, and probabilistic; that is, the way within which individuals appraise their environment will shape their affective and behavioral reactions, much more than the environment per se. For instance, uncertainty is triggered when information about such events is unavailable, inconsistent, or unknown. Uncertainty has also a temporal dimension, that is, it can be short-lived (i.e., fluctuating, and dynamic) or ongoing (e.g., chronic) (Lazarus & Folkman, Reference Lazarus and Folkman1984). The appraisal theories help to explain this assertion. When uncertainty is provoked by a stimulus (e.g., an event) it will trigger transient affective or behavioral reactions. On the opposite, when an individual tends to feel uncertain or insecure in his/her daily life, then this might be more related to his/her personality traits.

The Mediating Role of Negative Affect

Uncertainty can be defined as an awareness of the unknown (Anderson et al., Reference Anderson, Carleton, Diefenbach and Han2019), however, even when an individual is aware of what s/he does not know, s/he tends to feel discomfort and anxiety, as individuals, in nature, prefer what they know and what is predictable (due to their need for control). Therefore, perceived uncertainty, as a lack of knowledge about something tends to make individuals feel uncomfortable, anxious, or stressed when experiencing it (Bakioğlu et al., Reference Bakioğlu, Korkmaz and Ercan2021; Carleton, Reference Carleton2012, Reference Carleton2016). Indeed, when individuals face uncertain events, they feel fear of what they do not know –a fundamental fear of individuals– triggering negative emotions (Carleton, Reference Carleton2012).

Appraisal theories of emotions also support the direct relationship between perceived uncertainty and negative affect (Moors et al., Reference Moors, Ellsworth, Scherer and Frijda2013). Negative affect includes a wide range of negative emotions (e.g., sad, fear, anxiety) and has been consistently recognized as a strong predictor of workplace-related behavior (Diener et al., Reference Diener, Thapa and Tay2020). According to diverse appraisal theorists (e.g., Moors et al., Reference Moors, Ellsworth, Scherer and Frijda2013), emotions serve an adaptive function for an individual when experiencing events; they are shaped by the appraisals that individuals make to the significance of their goals and task accomplishment. For instance, uncertainty about goals and outcomes is a frequent appraisal dimension (Moors et al., Reference Moors, Ellsworth, Scherer and Frijda2013) that tends to make the individual feel negative emotions. For instance, Bakioğlu et al., in 2020, showed that uncertainty was a positive predictor of the fear of COVID–19, depression, anxiety, and stress. This was also empirically demonstrated by Junça-Silva and Silva (Reference Junça-Silva and Silva2022), in their diary study. The authors evidenced that daily uncertainty triggered fluctuations in daily negative affect, impairing therefore mental health. Thus, when individuals appraise a situation as uncertain of their goal attainment, it will arouse negative affective reactions.

By triggering negative affective reactions, uncertainty might influence work-related behaviors, such as adaptive performance – which is crucial in the context of changes (Griffin et al., 2017). Perceived uncertainty at work tends to follow significant work changes (Mäder & Niessen, Reference Mäder and Niessen2017); indeed, a context marked by significant changes, as is the COVID–19 pandemic, requires an additional effort for individuals to deal with and adapt to such changes (Mäder & Niessen, Reference Mäder and Niessen2017). Hence, in such contexts, adaptive performance –defined as the adaptability of the individual to changes in the work systems or roles (Griffin et al., Reference Griffin, Neal and Parker2007)– is even more needed (Griffin et al., Reference Griffin, Parker and Mason2010).

Empirically, the relationship between uncertainty and negative affect, and between this and job performance is well-documented (e.g., Junça-Silva et al., Reference Junça-Silva, Caetano and Lopes2017; Ohly & Schmitt, Reference Ohly and Schmitt2015), however, affective antecedents of adaptive performance are under-investigated as evidenced in several reviews (Baard et al., Reference Baard, Rench and Kozlowski2014; Hwang et al., Reference Hwang, Sung, Chang and Huang2020; Jundt et al., Reference Jundt, Shoss and Huang2015; Park & Park, Reference Park and Park2019, Reference Park and Park2021). Indeed, as indicated in those studies the majority of attention related to affect is in relation to emotional stability (e.g., Neal et al., Reference Neal, Wood, Wu and Kurlander2011), and not to adaptive performance. For instance, recently, Ferreira et al. (Reference Ferreira, da Costa Ferreira, Cooper and Oliveira2019), in their 10-day diary study, showed that negative affect and emotional exhaustion predicted productivity loss. Sprajcer et al. (Reference Sprajcer, Jay, Vincent, Vakulin, Lack and Ferguson2018) with an experimental study on uncertain working conditions, showed that participants in the condition of perceived uncertainty felt more anxious and had poorer cognitive performances (than participants in the non-uncertain condition). Mäder and Niessen (Reference Mäder and Niessen2017), using a sample of 131 employee-supervisor dyads, evidenced an indirect effect of negative affect on the relationship between job insecurity and adaptive performance, via negative affect and negative work reflections. Thibodeau et al. (Reference Thibodeau, Carleton, Gómez-Pérez and Asmundson2013) in their experiment showed that perceived uncertainty negatively impacted day-to-day behaviors and contributed to undesired consequences, such as experiencing higher levels of anxiety and negative affect in general and increases in heart rate.

Thus, based on these empirical findings, we argue that perceived uncertainty at work will shape adaptive performance through the experience of negative affect. That is, when individuals face and perceive uncertainty, they will experience negative affect that, consequently, will impair their ability to adapt to occurring changes. Hence, we hypothesized the following:

The Moderating Role of Mindfulness

The IMUT theory argues that individual differences moderate (buffer or intensify) the individuals’ reactions to perceived uncertainty (Hillen et al., Reference Hillen, Gutheil, Strout, Smets and Han2017). Recently, scholars and practitioners have recognized the importance of socio-cognitive mindfulness in the workplace (e.g., Pirson et al., Reference Pirson, Langer and Zilcha2018).

Socio-cognitive mindfulness has been demonstrated to be a relevant cognitive strategy at work (e.g., Junça-Silva et al., Reference Junça-Silva, Pombeira and Caetano2021; Langer, Reference Langer2009). It was defined as an active mindset characterized by novel distinction–drawing that helps the individual to be (a) focused in the present, (b) sensitive to context and perspective, that is, to what happens around, and (c) guided (but not governed) by rules and routines (Langer & Moldoveanu, Reference Langer and Moldoveanu2000). According to Langer (Reference Langer, le, Ngnoumen and Langer2014), mindfulness, as a cognitive flexibility, enables individuals to reevaluate a variety of situations and experiences, allowing negative experiences to be perceived more positively.

For Langer (Reference Langer1989), the individuals’ mindset may be mindful or mindless. Accordingly, mindfulness includes three dimensions and is defined as a flexible mindset depicted in the cognitive flexibility that promotes the degree to which individuals search for new and innovative perspectives (novelty seeking), the degree to which individuals actively behave in creative and innovative solutions (novelty producing) and the degree to which individuals are able and motivated to engage with the present moment/situation (engagement) (Langer, Reference Langer2005, Reference Langer2009). On the opposite, mindlessness is a rigid mindset where the individual is only able to be focused on one single perspective, acting automatically, and basing his/her thoughts and actions in the past, independent of what happens or the context in itself (Langer, Reference Langer2005).

Due to its cognitive properties (flexible mindset), mindfulness has been seen as a buffer of diverse contextual factors (e.g., events) on diverse key individual outcomes, for instance, well-being (Junça-Silva et al., Reference Junça-Silva, Pombeira and Caetano2021) and performance (Petrou, Reference Petrou2021). Mindfulness may increase individual self-regulation by increasing self-control even when facing negative events, such as uncertain ones (Petrou, Reference Petrou2021). Moreover, the cognitive flexibility inherent to mindfulness may assist individuals to easily adapt to uncertain contexts filled with changes. For instance, actively searching for novel ways of doing things, or thinking about them may facilitate the individuals’ reactions to uncertain settings. In addition, being able to notice what is surrounding, may act like a condition that signals the individual the need for adaptive behaviors, in a proactive way.

Indeed, mindfulness increases the ability to focus on the present moment helping individuals to manage and adjust behavior, which is beneficial for adaptive performance despite of any daily challenges that they experience at work (Glomb et al., Reference Glomb, Duffy, Bono, Yang, Joshi, Liao and Martocchio2011; Johnstone & Wilson-Prangley, Reference Johnstone and Wilson-Prangley2021). Petrou (Reference Petrou2021) in his diary study demonstrated that the lack of closure was related to job performance, however, this relation was moderated by mindfulness, in such a way that lack of closure was negatively related to day-level performance for low employee mindfulness and positively related to day-level performance for high employee mindfulness. Good et al. (Reference Good, Lyddy, Glomb, Bono, Brown, Duffy, Baer, Brewer and Lazar2016) demonstrated that mindfulness buffered the detrimental effects of daily difficulties on resources such as psychological capital. Catalino and Fredrickson (Reference Catalino and Fredrickson2011) evidenced that daily events at work impacted flourishing at work, however, this relation was moderated by mindfulness, in such a way that mindful individuals showed increases in their flourishing levels, even after experiencing negative daily events.

We argue that uncertainty can be managed as individuals may adopt cognitive strategies to better deal with such experiences. Thus, we propose that mindfulness may be a suitable socio-cognitive resource for individuals to buffer the negative effects of uncertainty. Hence, we hypothesized the following:

Mindfulness is an individual condition that helps people handle distress and negative affect (Röthlin et al., Reference Röthlin, Horvath, Birrer and Holtforth2016). Empirically, this has been demonstrated through several working contexts. For instance, Johnstone and Wilson-Prangley (Reference Johnstone and Wilson-Prangley2021) showed that mindfulness created conditions that improved individuals’ adaptability to uncertain and stressful conditions and acted as an affective regulation strategy for such conditions. In a similar vein, Junça-Silva et al. (Reference Junça-Silva, Pombeira and Caetano2021) evidenced that mindful of individuals, even when facing daily hassles and experiencing negative affect, were able to focus on the tasks at hand, which led to enhanced levels of performance. Moreover, Hafenbrack and Vohs (Reference Hafenbrack and Vohs2018), in their experiment, showed that mindfulness moderated the relationship between stressors and performance; they demonstrated that mindfulness enabled people to detach from stressors, which improved their focus on the tasks, even when they experienced some stressful situation. Janssen et al. (Reference Janssen, van Strydonck, Decuypere, Decramer and Audenaert2020) also evidenced that mindfulness moderated the relationships between work pressures and job performance indicators, and between work engagement and job performance. The authors highlighted with their findings that under high-work-pressure settings, more mindful individuals still had better job performance and work engagement outcomes than less mindful of individuals. Röthlin et al. (Reference Röthlin, Horvath, Birrer and Holtforth2016) explored the moderating role of mindfulness in demanding situations in sports and they found that it was related to fewer performance worries and prevented the remaining worries from influencing athletes’ behavior, thereby helping them to perform better. Additionally, Glomb et al. (Reference Glomb, Duffy, Bono, Yang, Joshi, Liao and Martocchio2011) evidenced that mindfulness was an individual condition that ameliorated self-regulation thoughts, emotions, and behaviors, and as such contributed to increased performance. The authors emphasized that mindfulness buffered the relationship between stressors and task performance as it helped employees to be more resilient in the face of challenges.

Thus, mindful of employees who experience perceived work-related uncertainty and negative affective reactions should be more likely to manage their behavior and attain adaptive performance. Thereby, based on these empirical findings, and the theoretical perspective of IMUT, we defined the following hypothesis.

H ₃: The positive moderating effect of mindfulness on the day-level relationship between uncertainty and adaptive performance is mediated by negative affect (mediated moderation effect, see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

The Hypothesized Multilevel Mediated-Moderation Model.

Method

Measures

Data Analysis

Daily repeated measurements were nested within individuals; therefore, multilevel analyses were conducted, using Mlmed-Macro (Rockwood, Reference Rockwood2017) to test the hypotheses. First, and to assure that we could proceed with the multilevel analysis, we calculated the analysis of variance components and we found significant within-person variance in uncertainty (intraclass correlation coefficient or ICC = 0.65), negative affect (ICC = 0.74), and adaptive performance (ICC = 0.57), lending support for the multilevel analysis.

Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 were tested through the macro–Multilevel Mediation (MLMed), in SPSS (Rockwood, Reference Rockwood2017). This macro delivers similar results, in the estimation of model parameters, to what other software alternatives do (e.g., Mplus). Plus, it appears to be particularly suitable for models that include cross-level moderators (Rockwood, Reference Rockwood2017), as is this the case. Based on Snijder and Bosker’s (Reference Snijders and Bosker1999) recommendations for multilevel models, the model fit was determined by observing the reduction in model deviance from data (–2LL) at each step, in comparison to a previous model.

Method

Theoretical Implications

First, two daily-diary studies answer the question of how uncertainty influences adaptive performance at work. This study shows specific mediating (negative affect) and moderating factors (mindfulness) in the context of perceived uncertainty regarding behavioral reactions (adaptive performance); it shows that perceived uncertainty influences certain work-related behaviors –adaptive behaviors regarding performance– through the experience of negative affective reactions. That is, when individuals perceive uncertainty at work, they tend to feel negative affect (e.g., fear) which, in turn, will threaten their adaptive behaviors. Therefore, we suggest not only testable hypotheses but also demonstrate a temporal sequence of perceived uncertainty effects that determine the individual’s uncertainty tolerance. A recent diary study, conducted by Junça-Silva and Silva (Reference Junça-Silva and Silva2022) has indeed demonstrated the fleeting nature of uncertainty and its affective nature. Accordingly, the authors showed that uncertainty positively predicted negative affect that, in turn, influenced individuals’ mental health. Similarly, Bottesi et al. (Reference Bottesi, Tesini, Cerea and Ghisi2018) showed that uncertainty was positively associated with negative affect, which in turn increased individuals’ emotional distress. In a similar vein, Bakioğlu et al. (Reference Bakioğlu, Korkmaz and Ercan2021) evidenced that, in general, uncertainty provoked discomfort and anxiety. Uncertainty occurs when something unknown, unexpected, and unpredictable occurs in the life of an individual. When this happens, individuals appraise that event making them feel emotions, such as insecure or bad about it. Perceived uncertainty about job goals and outcomes is an appraisal dimension proposed by many appraisal theorists (see Moors et al., Reference Moors, Ellsworth, Scherer and Frijda2013). Thus, the appraised uncertainty of an event is likely to be related to emotional experiences. In this vein, “emotions are adaptive processes that reflect appraisals of features of the environment that are significant for the organism’s survival and well-being” (Anderson et al., Reference Anderson, Carleton, Diefenbach and Han2019, p. 4). Thus, based on these empirical findings, and theoretical assumptions, we may conclude that perceived uncertainty at work is an affective construct with behavioral consequences.

Second, mindfulness dampens the detrimental effects of daily uncertainty on daily adaptive performance, and it also interacts with negative affect to buffer its impact on adaptive performance, in uncertain conditions. Thus, mindfulness –a socio-cognitive resource characterized by a flexible mindset- allows individuals to actively construct novel categories (Pirson et al., Reference Pirson, Langer and Zilcha2018) that enable them to reevaluate uncertain events and engage in adequate behaviours when facing such events (Langer, Reference Langer2005). As such, mindful of individuals, even in the presence of highly perceived uncertainty, are able to better manage their reactions and, as such their adaptive performance is higher (when compared to mindless individuals). This might happen because mindful of individuals are able to focus on their goals despite the presence of uncertain working conditions. Langer (Reference Langer2005) argued that socio-cognitive mindfulness helps workers to seek what is new and innovative and to actively engage in its implementation. Therefore, it is likely that mindful individuals, when experiencing higher levels of uncertainty, accept it and manage it based on their own values; for instance, mindfulness may decrease the person’s struggle to change what is happening (Waterschoot et al., Reference Waterschoot, van der Kaap-Deeder, Morbée, Soenens and Vansteenkiste2021), and such personal resources can thus be employed in achieving objectives, rather than in avoiding or changing the context or internal experience (Götmann & Bechtoldt, Reference Götmann and Bechtoldt2021). Further, mindfulness may also imply a greater tolerance of uncertainty (Matta et al., Reference Matta, Rogova and Luna-Cortés2022) –the tendency to consider the possibility of a negative event occurring unacceptable, irrespective of the probability of occurrence (Carleton et al., Reference Carleton, Norton and Asmundson2007)– which may also explain why adaptive performance is higher for mindful employees (even when uncertainty increases). Recent studies have shown the diverse benefits of being mindful during the pandemic. For instance, mindfulness is related to several psychological benefits such as enhanced self-regulation (Brown & Ryan, Reference Brown and Ryan2003), improved coping with stressful periods (Sweeny & Howell, Reference Sweeny and Howell2017), and better emotional regulation with negative affective experiences (Junça-Silva et al., Reference Junça-Silva, Pombeira and Caetano2021). Plus, mindfulness helps people to identify positive aspects even in difficult situations as was the COVID–19 pandemic (Götmann & Bechtoldt, Reference Götmann and Bechtoldt2021), or to use self-regulation strategies to deal with mandatory confinements (Waterschoot et al., Reference Waterschoot, van der Kaap-Deeder, Morbée, Soenens and Vansteenkiste2021). Hence, it is not surprising that higher levels of mindfulness buffer the detrimental effects of perceived uncertainty on adaptive performance.

Moreover, mindfulness also interacts with negative affect in the mediating path from uncertainty to adaptive performance via negative affect. However, the two studies present a slightly different pattern of results, suggesting that this relationship is contextually dependent. In Study 1, the findings evidence a positive cross-level interaction between negative affect and mindfulness to adaptive performance, whereas in Study 2, we find a negative interaction term. That is, while in Study 1 adaptive performance increases, when mindfulness interacts with negative affect, even in the presence of high perceived uncertainty, in the second study, adaptive performance decreases. We must consider the two samples to support these results; that is, in Study 1, participants were teleworking, were completely confined, and most of them held an undergraduate academic degree, while in Study 2 participants were no longer teleworking, nor were confined, and had lower education levels. So, the working settings are different (working from home versus face-to-face work), as well as the social context (mandatory confinement versus non-mandatory confinement) which might account for these findings. By working from home, individuals have the advantages of a time economy from non-commuting (Grant et al., Reference Grant, Wallace, Spurgeon, Tramontano and Charalampous2019). Moreover, working from home is recognized by having the advantage of increased job autonomy and time flexibility (Grant et al., Reference Grant, Wallace, Spurgeon, Tramontano and Charalampous2019) which may be a resource that helps the individual to better manage his/her time, influencing adaptive performance. Hence, in these working settings, teleworkers can easily turn around and have resources that allow them to better manage their reaction to uncertainty, and as such, negative affect, when interacting with higher levels of mindfulness, leads to improved performance. Further, while working from home, participants benefit from working in their “safe place”, which may also explain the positive interaction between negative affect and mindfulness regarding their adaptive performance (Shipman et al., Reference Shipman, Burrell and Huff Mac Pherson2021). On the opposite, participants from Study 2, who were working at the office (and were less educated), appear to have fewer resources to manage the perceived uncertainty and their negative affective reactions which lead to them decreasing their adaptive performance. Face-to-face work may drain even more resources; for example, employees have to go to work and waste time in traffic jams (Junça Silva et al., Reference Junça Silva, Neves and Caetano2022), or have to deal face-to-face with customers, coworkers, and supervisors which may trigger a resource loss process (Chong et al., Reference Chong, Huang and Chang2020). All in all, face-to-face work may impair employees’ ability to cope with negative affect, that in turn, leads to decreased levels of adaptive performance (even for mindful employees).

Despite the differences, in both studies, adaptive performance is higher for those who score higher in mindfulness. Hence, by interacting with mindfulness, negative affective reactions to perceived uncertainty appear to improve adaptive performance, maybe as a form to reduce uncertainty. Uncertainty may be less for those who tend to actively search for information and construct novel categories (Brashers, Reference Brashers2001; Pirson et al., Reference Pirson, Langer and Zilcha2018) which is thereby compatible with the concept of socio-cognitive mindfulness. Indeed, as Griffin and Grote (Reference Griffin and Grote2020) noted, individuals are heavily and primarily motivated to reduce uncertainty. Hence, by perceiving uncertainty, mindful individuals (through their ability to reevaluate more positively a variety of negative situations and experiences; Langer, Reference Langer, le, Ngnoumen and Langer2014) may direct their attention to the reevaluation of uncertainty and engage in adaptive behaviors.

Thus, the findings highlight the importance of mindfulness in the work setting as it may provide conditions and tools for individuals better manage their reactions to what happens, in this case, to uncertain working conditions. According to the socio-cognitive mindfulness model (Langer, Reference Langer, le, Ngnoumen and Langer2014), mindful individuals appear to be more cognitively flexible in interpreting uncertainty. Thus, in light of this evidence, we may say that mindfulness not only helps individuals to reevaluate more positively uncertain events but also lend them to actively engage in adaptive behaviors. Therefore, mindfulness brings light to the unknown as it fills in the blank spaces of uncertainty attenuating the fear and other negative affective impacts and, at the same time, improving adaptive behaviors.

This research allows us to conclude that daily uncertainty, daily negative affect and mindfulness are important variables for daily adaptive performance. This study also emphasizes that the detrimental effects of uncertainty are buffered by individuals’ mindfulness. However, one must also consider the period in which each study was conducted – that is, during the pandemic COVID–19 crisis – even though at different pandemic stages. Hence, the recommendation strategies must be followed and implemented with some caution.

The results of this study may be relevant and useful for managers, who can find here evidence that mindfulness might be a resource to manage uncertainty. First, it would be useful to design and implement mindfulness programs to develop individuals, for instance, through training or coaching sessions. Second, it would also be relevant to create times and spaces for the practice of mindfulness at work. Third, managers may consider promoting conditions for workers to seek and implement novelty behaviors in their tasks. Stimulating a resource like mindfulness may lead to adaptive behaviors in uncertain work situations, which results in better performances. In addition, it would be interesting, from a practical point of view, to create “mindful days” in which individuals could share their ideas freely. Plus, a reward to “sharing individuals – those who share mindful of stories” could be thought of as a practical manner to improve adaptive work-related behaviors.

In a VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous) (Bennett & Lemoine, Reference Bennett and Lemoine2014) world, characterized by a significant increase in uncertainty, organizations face a relevant organizational risk. Therefore, managers may consider some strategies. First, given the increase in uncertainty events, it would be relevant to increase the information sharing among workers about organizational processes, dynamics, and changes to minimize the fear of the unknown and other negative effects triggered by uncertainty. Second, resorting to teleworking may be a strategy to deliver positive outcomes. Moreover, given the increased numbers of workers working remotely, some of them, for the first time, and thus experiencing anxiety due to a new experience, managers would increase their support to workers, and manage organizational conditions to improve perceived organizational support.

This research has some limitations. First, we used self-reported measures, which might lead to common method variance (Podsakoff, Reference Podsakoff2017). To overcome this, future studies would use other sources of information (e.g., colleagues, supervisors) regarding daily adaptive performance. Second, we only focused on daily negative affect; however positive affect may also be relevant for daily adaptive performance (Junça-Silva et al., Reference Junça-Silva, Pombeira and Caetano2021). Third, we only measured mindfulness once, because we were interested in the cross-level interaction. However, analyzing the within-person dynamics of mindfulness should be relevant to explore in future studies (Pirson et al., Reference Pirson, Langer and Zilcha2018). At last, both studies are based on data collected from different occupational sectors which may influence the generalizability of these results. Hence, apart from generalizing the findings with some caution, future studies could test the proposed model in specific occupational sectors to understand whether the findings are similar to the ones obtained in this research.

Future studies should test the model, with other moderators (e.g., emotional regulation strategies). Second, future research should test the model with other criterion variables, for instance, health and happiness. To do this, future studies could use objective measures of health (e.g., heart rate or blood pressure). Lastly, the different findings between Studies 1 and 2, particularly the interaction between mindfulness and negative affect regarding adaptive performance can also be justified by the different periods of data collection and the different circumstances (mandatory versus out of the mandatory confinement); hence, future studies could retest the model to better understand the pattern of the results.

Overall, in the analyzed sample, the data shows that uncertainty increases negative affect which, in turn, minimizes adaptive performance, on a daily basis, in particular for those working at the office. This relation appears to be different for teleworkers, as those high on mindfulness engage in more adaptive performance when negative affect is high. Thus, mindfulness –as a socio-cognitive resource- when interacting with uncertainty and with negative affect buffers the negative impact of perceived uncertainty on adaptive performance. In light of this evidence, the findings support that uncertainty interacts with mindfulness and this one ‘brings light’ to the unknown as it fills in its blank spaces attenuating the fear and other negative affective impacts and improving adaptive behaviors.