Challenge-hindrance stressors and counterproductive work behavior: a cross-cultural meta-analysis

Workplace stress has long been linked to counterproductive work behavior (CWB), yet the challenge-hindrance stressor model (CHM) has rarely been examined as a direct explanation for harmful, norm-violating employee behavior across cultural contexts. Drawing on the CHM, we conducted a meta-analysis, reported in accordance with PRISMA 2020, to examine whether challenge and hindrance stressors are differentially associated with CWB and whether these relationships vary by national culture and method. We searched PsycINFO, Web of Science, EBSCO, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar (January 1976–December 2025), supplemented by hand searches; two trained coders extracted 70 effect sizes from 60 independent samples (25,319 employees, 17 countries). Using random-effects psychometric meta-analytic procedures, we corrected correlations for sampling and measurement error and tested Hofstede’s five cultural dimensions, study design, and CWB rating source as moderators. Results showed that hindrance stressors were positively associated with CWB, whereas challenge stressors showed no significant overall relationship with CWB. The hindrance stressor-CWB relationship was more pronounced in cultures lower in power distance, higher in individualism, higher in masculinity, and lower in uncertainty avoidance, but did not vary meaningfully by long-term orientation. Methodological analyses indicated a larger corrected estimate in self-rated than other-rated CWB samples, whereas study design did not meaningfully alter the association. Findings clarify that hindrance stressors are the work demands most consistently associated with harmful employee behavior. These findings also extend the CHM by showing that the stressor-CWB relationship is culturally bounded and methodologically sensitive, highlighting the need for culturally informed stress-management and CWB-prevention practices.