| Literature DB >> 34205508 |
Mavis Agyemang Opoku1, Hyejung Yoon2, Seung-Wan Kang1, Myoungsoon You3.
Abstract
This study examines the relationship between emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction. We further propose a safety climate and compensation as contextual variables that weaken the effect of emotional exhaustion. Survey data collected from 694 employees of a public hospital provided support for the hypothesized research model. The hierarchical multiple regression results reveal that high emotional exhaustion is negatively related to job satisfaction. In addition, the results suggest that compensation and a safety climate are moderating variables that mitigate the negative effects of emotional exhaustion. The theoretical implications and future directions are discussed.Entities:
Keywords: compensation; emotional exhaustion; job satisfaction; safety climate
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34205508 PMCID: PMC8296501 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18126641
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Hypothesized research model.
Demographic characteristics of the sample.
| Variable | Percent |
|---|---|
| Gender | |
| Male | 21.76 |
| Female | 78.24 |
| Age | |
| 20–29 | 38.04% |
| 30–39 | 34.58% |
| 40–49 | 18.73% |
| 50–59 | 8.51% |
| 60–69 | 0.14% |
| Education | |
| High School | 6.20% |
| 2–year College | 38.18% |
| 4–year College | 41.79% |
| Masters | 11.38% |
| Doctoral | 2.45% |
| Employment | |
| Regular Staff = 1 | 85.01% |
| Contract Staff = 2 | 14.99% |
| Organizational tenure (in years) | |
| <1 | 8.36% |
| 1–2 | 29.68% |
| 3–4 | 19.45% |
| 5–8 | 13.26% |
| 9–12 | 6.92% |
| 13–16 | 4.03% |
| 17–20 | 7.06% |
| 21–24 | 6.34% |
| >25 | 4.90% |
| Department | |
| Medical | 9.22% |
| Nurse | 53.46% |
| Administration | 10.09% |
| Healthcare (Ex. physical therapists and radiologists) | 18.73% |
| Research | 1.44% |
| Others | 7.06% |
| Position | |
| Employee = 1 | 79.54% |
| Deputy leader = 2 | 7.64% |
| Team leader = 3 | 3.46% |
| Manager or higher = 4 | 9.36 |
Descriptive statistics and inter-correlations.
| Mean | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Education | 2.66 | 0.85 | − | |||||||
| 2. Tenure | 3.82 | 2.28 | 0.08 * | − | ||||||
| 3. Employment (regular staff) | 1.28 | 0.74 | −0.04 | 0.21*** | − | |||||
| 4. Position | 1.66 | 1.64 | −0.22 *** | 0.19 *** | −0.26 *** | − | ||||
| 5. Emotional exhaustion | 4.45 | 1.26 | −0.11 ** | −0.17 *** | 0.20 *** | −0.20 *** | (0.91) | |||
| 6. Compensation | 3.05 | 1.56 | 0.02 | 0.25 *** | −0.13 *** | 0.08 | −0.40 *** | (0.96) | ||
| 7. Safety climate | 4.83 | 1.11 | −0.02 | 0.35 *** | 0.03 | 0.00 | −0.28 *** | 0.46 *** | (0.95) | |
| 8. Job satisfaction | 4.61 | 1.34 | 0.13 *** | 0.34 *** | −0.08 ** | 0.16 *** | −0.52 *** | 0.57 *** | 0.61 *** | (0.95) |
Note: n = 694. Cronbach’s alpha values for each scale are reported in parentheses on the diagonal. Employment was coded as regular staff = 1 and contract staff = 0. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 (two-tailed).
Model fit statistics for the measurement models.
| Measurement Model | χ2 | Df | CFI | TLI | RMSEA | Δχ2 | Δdf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline (hypothesized) four factor model | 275.62 *** | 106 | 0.99 | 0.98 | 0.05 | ||
| Alternative 1 (three factor model) 1 | 1335.56 *** | 109 | 0.89 | 0.86 | 0.13 | 1059.94 *** | 3 |
| Alternative 2 (two factor model) 2 | 2642.64 *** | 111 | 0.78 | 0.72 | 0.18 | 2367.02 *** | 5 |
| Alternative 3 (one factor model) 3 | 3879.72 *** | 112 | 0.67 | 0.59 | 0.22 | 3604.10 *** | 6 |
Note: n = 694. *, p < 0.05, **, p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 (two-tailed test). 1 Three factor model with compensation and satisfaction on the same factor. 2 Two factor model with emotional exhaustion, safety climate and compensation on the same factor. 3 Three factor model with emotional exhaustion, safety climate, compensation and job satisfaction on the same factor.
Hierarchical multiple regression for job satisfaction.
| Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education | 0.09 | 0.06 | 0.09 ** | 0.08 ** | 0.08 ** |
| Tenure | 0.36 *** | 0.27 *** | 0.09 ** | 0.08 ** | 0.08 ** |
| Employment (regular staff) | −0.15 *** | −0.05 | −0.00 | −0.01 | −0.01 |
| Position | 0.04 | −0.01 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 |
| Emotional exhaustion (EE) | −0.46 *** | −0.28 *** | −0.27*** | −0.28 *** | |
| Safety climate (SC) | 0.38 *** | 0.38*** | 0.38 *** | ||
| Compensation (CO) | 0.26 *** | 0.27*** | 0.27 *** | ||
|
| |||||
| EE x SC | 0.05 * | 0.01 | |||
| EE x CO | 0.08 ** | 0.08 ** | |||
| F | 31.17 *** | 71.47 *** | 117.07 *** | 119.08 *** | 105.71 *** |
| R2 | 0.15 | 0.34 | 0.57 | 0.58 | 0.58 |
| Adj R2 | 0.14 | 0.33 | 0.56 | 0.57 | 0.57 |
| Finc | 197.20 *** | 127.40 *** | 130.93 ***a | 0.06 |
Note: n = 694. Employment was coded as regular staff = 1 and contract staff = 2; employee position was coded as employee = 1, deputy leader = 2, team leader = 3 and manager or higher = 4. Entries are the standardized regression coefficients. a = F-test compared with Model 2. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 (two-tailed test).
Figure 2The moderating effect of the safety climate on the relationship between emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction.
Simple slope test.
| Moderator | Safety Climate | Compensation |
|---|---|---|
| Low level of moderator | −0.35 *** | −0.37 *** |
| High level of moderator | −0.25 *** | −0.22 *** |
| Simple slope difference test | 0.10 * | 0.15 ** |
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 (two-tailed test).
Figure 3The moderating effect of compensation on the relationship between emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction.