| Literature DB >> 33923507 |
Xiaoyi Yang1, Boling Zhang1, Lulu Wang1, Lanxin Cao1, Ruipeng Tong1.
Abstract
Safety compliance (SC) and safety participation (SP), which are key factors predicting safety outcomes (e.g., accidents, injuries and near misses), are related but distinct. However, which component is more significant remains controversial. Job burnout is a typical occupational psychological syndrome of employees that impacts safety outcomes, but the role that it plays in the relationship between SC, SP and safety outcomes is ambiguous. To clarify these relationships, Chinese coal mine workers were sampled. Then, hypotheses on the influencing mechanisms were initially proposed and later tested empirically. To conduct this testing, SC and SP scales were revised, and a job burnout scale was developed. The results showed that there were significant relationships between workers' SC and SP and safety outcomes; meanwhile, exhaustion, cynicism and low professional efficacy had significant effects on these relationships. Job burnout acted as a significant and indispensable moderator. Moreover, workers' occupational psychological health condition should be considered when improving safety outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: job burnout; occupational psychological health; safety compliance; safety outcomes; safety participation
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33923507 PMCID: PMC8073523 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18084223
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Hypothetical model.
The items of the SC and SP scales.
| Components | Items | |
|---|---|---|
| SC | 1–1. | I use all the required safety equipment during my working time, such as keeping on my gloves even if I feel that doing so is inconvenient |
| 1–2. | I comply with the necessary safety rules and procedures during my working time, such as the safety operating instructions for my post | |
| 1–3. | I ensure the highest levels of safety during my working time, such as checking the environment to ensure safety | |
| 1–4. | I take the appropriate steps if I was prevented from or punished for exercising my rights under safety rules and procedure, such as arguing with my squad leader | |
| SP | 2–1. | I help my coworkers make sure that they perform their work safely, such as taking action to stop violations |
| 2–2. | If I notice any safety-related matters, I always let my squad leader or safety inspector know the issues | |
| 2–3. | I make extra efforts to make the safety of my work better, for example reforming the method the job is done to make it safer | |
| 2–4. | I volunteered to carry out tasks or activities which could improve workplace safety, for example, attending safety-oriented but non-mandatory trainings frequently | |
| 2–5. | I encourage my coworkers to work safely, such as communicating the results if an accident happens | |
Note: SC means safety compliance, SP means safety participation.
Rotated component matrix of the job burnout scale for coal miners.
| Items | Dimensions | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EX | CY | LPE | ||
| 1. | My job makes me feel emotionally drained |
| 0.062 | 0.053 |
| 2. | I feel tired and fatigued after work |
| 0.087 | 0.106 |
| 3. | When I weak up in the morning, once I notice I have to face my job, the feeling of exhausted exhaustion emerges |
| 0.165 | 0.027 |
| 4. | Working all day is really a strain for me |
| 0.302 | 0.089 |
| 5. | I am so weak and susceptible to illness 1 |
| 0.288 | −0.097 |
| 6. | I always express negative emotions at work | 0.221 |
| 0.032 |
| 7. | I have become more cynical about whether my work contributes anything | 0.176 |
| 0.066 |
| 8. | I feel less and less interested in my job since I started as an employee | 0.327 |
| 0.103 |
| 9. | The meaning of my job is doubtful | 0.154 |
| 0.058 |
| 10. | My work bores me a lot | 0.364 |
| 0.083 |
| 11. | I just want to finish the assigned job and not be disturbed by other coworkers or things 2 | 0.277 |
| 0.053 |
| 12. | I feel that I am making effective contributions to what my company does | −0.029 | 0.073 |
|
| 13. | I will feel comfortable when I complete a task effectively | −0.034 | –0.127 |
|
| 14. | I am able to effectively solve the problems in my work | −0.031 | 0.266 |
|
| 15. | In my opinion, I am good at my job | 0.003 | 0.173 |
|
| 16. | I feel exhilarated after I solve a problem in my work | 0.234 | –0.289 |
|
Note: EX, CY and LPE mean exhaustion, cynicism and low professional efficacy, respectively. 1 This item was exacted from the BM and OLBI scales. 2 This item was exacted from the MBI–HSS scale. 3 The bold means this Item match with the Dimension.
Demographic distribution of the participants (n = 367).
| Characteristic | % | Characteristic | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Work experience | ||
| Male | 100 | Less than 5 years | 21.2 |
| Age | 5–10 years | 37.7 | |
| ≤30 | 25.4 | 11–20 years | 26.3 |
| 31–40 | 45.7 | Most than 20 years | 14.8 |
| 41–50 | 24.6 | Trade type | |
| ≥51 | 4.3 | Dig-in | 19.7 |
| Education level | Coal mining | 21.4 | |
| Primary school or below | 10.3 | Transportation | 18.6 |
| Junior high school | 43.8 | Electromechanical guarantees | 16.5 |
| High school or technical secondary school | 38.5 | Ventilation | 8.2 |
| Junior college or above | 7.4 | Other | 15.6 |
Statistical results of the measure.
| Items | Loading | α | M | SD | Items | Loading | α | M | SD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Safety performance | CY-1 | 0.736 | 0.785 | 2.227 | 0.601 | ||||
| SC-1 | 0.649 | 0.806 | 3.982 | 0.641 | CY-2 | 0.664 | 2.074 | 0.572 | |
| SC-2 | 0.745 | 3.653 | 0.625 | CY-3 | 0.827 | 2.523 | 0.532 | ||
| SC-3 | 0.896 | 3.566 | 0.632 | CY-4 | 0.674 | 2.302 | 0.544 | ||
| SC-4 | 0.677 | 4.010 | 0.638 | CY-5 | 0.776 | 2.431 | 0.556 | ||
| SP-1 | 0.763 | 0.811 | 1.877 | 0.852 | CY-6 | 0.683 | 2.510 | 0.562 | |
| SP-2 | 0.687 | 3.145 | 0.847 | LEP-1 | 0.658 | 0.791 | 2.003 | 0.607 | |
| SP-3 | 0.661 | 2.664 | 0.823 | LEP-1 | 0.761 | 1.762 | 0.668 | ||
| SP-4 | 0.739 | 2.542 | 0.836 | LEP-1 | 0.745 | 1.807 | 0.701 | ||
| SP-5 | 0.724 | 2.566 | 0.859 | LEP-1 | 0.893 | 1.941 | 0.683 | ||
| Job burnout | LEP-5 | 0.762 | 1.934 | 0.674 | |||||
| EX-1 | 0.823 | 0.801 | 2.963 | 0.732 | Safety outcomes | ||||
| EX-2 | 0.645 | 3.417 | 0.726 | Accidents | 0.756 | 0.821 | 0.132 | 0.010 | |
| EX-3 | 0.667 | 3.182 | 0.674 | Injuries | 0.861 | 0.266 | 0.033 | ||
| EX-4 | 0.805 | 2.766 | 0.698 | Near misses | 0.963 | 3.225 | 0.074 | ||
| EX-5 | 0.834 | 2.857 | 0.708 | ||||||
Note: M means mean value, SD means standard deviation.
Results of convergent validity and discriminant validity examination.
| CR | AVE | Discriminant Validity | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SC | SP | EX | CY | LEP | Safety Outcomes | |||
| SC | 0.833 | 0.559 |
| |||||
| SP | 0.840 | 0.512 | 0.568 |
| ||||
| EX | 0.871 | 0.576 | 0.421 | 0.352 |
| |||
| CY | 0.871 | 0.532 | 0.543 | 0.326 | 0.574 |
| ||
| LEP | 0.877 | 0.589 | 0.419 | 0.564 | 0.463 | 0.612 |
| |
| Safety outcomes | 0.898 | 0.747 | 0.602 | 0.477 | 0.546 | 0.493 | 0.467 |
|
Note: CR means composite reliability, AVE means average variance extracted. 1 The bold means discriminant validity.
Figure 2The accepted SEM.
Fit indices of the accepted structural equation model (SEM).
| Index | GFI | RMR | RMSEA | AGFI | NFI | CFI | IFI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | 0.886 | 0.059 | 0.068 | 0.884 | 0.889 | 0.882 | 0.887 |
| Evaluation | Good | Moderate | Reasonable | Good | Good | Good | Good |
Note: GFI means goodness-of-fit index, RMR means root mean square residual, RMSEA means root mean square error of approximation, AGFI means adjusted goodness-of-fit index, NFI means normed fit index, CFI means comparative fit index, IFI means incremental fit index.