| Literature DB >> 36119850 |
Abstract
Covid-19 has disrupted the lives of employees all over the world. After experiencing a prolonged yet ongoing destructive event (i.e. Covid-19), finding an effective and non-invasive way to get employees back and engage in work is a huge challenge for scholars. Few studies have focused on returning to work after a traumatic event (limited time), but the post-pandemic psychological stress caused by the Covid-19 (PAPIST19) has not received much attention. Current research addresses this gap and uses a comprehensive model drawn from the transactional model of stress and the Kahn psychological framework to advance the work of predicting PAPIST19. Specifically, the current research investigates how PAPIST19 is related to job engagement, and emotional exhaustion and how job reattachment mediates the relationship. In addition, we use health support climate (HSC) as a boundary condition in our model, which can weaken the impact of PAPIST19 and enhance the effectiveness of job reattachment in reducing emotional exhaustion and increasing job engagement. To test our model, we collected data in multiple waves from Chinese seaports, where seafarers came to work after the restrictions were lifted in China. The current research is one of the earliest scholarly contributions. It paved the way for the research to solve the problem of workers returning to work after large-scale destructive events, and discussed important implications.Entities:
Keywords: Covid-19; Emotional exhaustion; Health support climate; Job engagement; Job reattachment; Seafarers
Year: 2022 PMID: 36119850 PMCID: PMC9464103 DOI: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106153
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ocean Coast Manag ISSN: 0964-5691 Impact factor: 4.295
Constructs definitions.
| Constructs | Explanation |
|---|---|
| The presence and severity of symptoms resulting from Covid-19-related posttraumatic psychological distress. | |
| The process of mentally reconnecting to one's work after a nonwork period | |
| The extent to which the employee perceived that organizational policies, practices, regulations, and procedures are enough to provide them health-supported climate within the organization. | |
| The degree to which individuals invest their physical, cognitive, and emotional energies into their role performance. | |
| The extent to which employees feel drained and overwhelmed by their work. |
Fig. 1Proposed research model.
Model fit indices and model comparison for CFA model with marker variable.
| Model | χ2 (df) | CFI | EMSEA (90% CI) | LR of Δ χ2 | Model Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CFA Marker | 1724.01 (968) | 0.93 | .053 (.049–.057) | ||
| Baseline | 1744.01 (978) | 0.91 | .058 (.052–.061) | ||
| Method-C | 1365.5 (977) | 0.94 | .055 (.051–.062) | 378.5, | Vs. Baseline |
| Method-U | 1054.8 (937) | 0.95 | .054 (.050–.058) | 310.7, | Vs. Method-C |
| Method-R | 995.5 (967) | 0.94 | .061 (.058–.069) | −59.3, | Vs. Method-U |
Note: “CFA = confirmatory factor analysis, CFA = comparative fit index, RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation, LR = likelihood ratio test, U = unconstrained, C = constrained, R = restricted”.
Descriptive statistics and correlations.
| X | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. C19 PTSD | 3.5 | .80 | 1 | |||||
| 2. Job Reattachment | 3.0 | 1.3 | -.39** | |||||
| 3. Emotional Exhaustion | 3.5 | 1.3 | .41** | -.42** | 1 | |||
| 4. Job Engagement | 3.4 | 1.0 | -.35** | .46** | -.21** | |||
| 5. Health Support Climate | 3.0 | 1.3 | -.13* | .26** | -.05 | .25** | 1 | |
| 6. Consciousness | 2.7 | 1.2 | .03 | -.07 | .14* | -.01 | .09 | |
| 7. Neuroticism | 3.5 | .94 | .14* | -.04 | .05 | .10 | .02 | .05 |
**<0.01, *p < .05, X = Mean, SD, Standard Deviation.
Series of factor analysis and fit indices.
| Models | Factors | χ2 | Df | χ2/df | Δχ2 | RMSEA | GFI | CFI | TLI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | 5Factors: PAPIST19, HSC, JR, EE, JE | 1724.01 | 968 | 1.78 | – | .05 | .98 | .93 | .93 |
| Model 2 | 4 Factors: PAPIST19, HSC, JR, EE | 945.3 | 419 | 2.25 | 1328.6 | .06 | .83 | .91 | .92 |
| Model 3 | 3 Factors: PAPIST19, JR, JE | 912.4 | 309 | 2.95 | 1121.9 | .09 | .85 | .81 | .88 |
| Model 3 | 2 Factor: HSC, JE | 668.2 | 188 | 3.55 | 900.7 | .10 | .79 | .74 | .62 |
Note: PAPIST19D = post-C19 psychological distress, HSC = health support climate, JR = job reattachment, EE = emotional exhaustion, JE = job engagement, SC, Consciousness, Neu = Neuroticism, χ2 = Chi-Square, df = degree of freedom, RMSEA = root mean square error approximation, GFI = Goodness of fit index, CFI, comparative fit index, TLI = Tucker-Lewis index.
HTMT analysis.
| 1. Job engagement | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2. PAPIST19 | 0.25 | |||||
| 3. Health support climate | 0.26 | 0.15 | ||||
| 4. Neuroticism | 0.29 | 0.52 | 0.10 | |||
| 5. Job reattachment | 0.48 | 0.37 | 0.27 | 0.32 | ||
| 6. Conscientiousness | 0.32 | 0.51 | 0.10 | 0.61 | 0.36 | |
| 7. Emotional exhaustion | 0.23 | 0.38 | 0.06 | 0.34 | 0.45 | 0.38 |
Standardized direct and indirect coefficients.
| Variables | Job reattachment | Emotional Exhaustion | Job engagement | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B (se) | p | CI (95%) | B (se) | p | CI (95%) | B (se) | p | CI (95%) | |
| Age | .02 (.06) | .35 | -.01, .18 | .07 (.08) | .21 | -.00, .08 | |||
| Gender | -.07 (.10) | .15 | -.31, .02 | -.09 (.11) | .89 | -.11, .02 | |||
| Conscientiousness | .13 (.06) | .04 | .10, .21 | -.14 (.05) | .05 | -.10, −.24 | |||
| Neuroticism | -.07 (.06) | .14 | -.17, .08 | -.02 (.06) | .72 | -.17, .01 | |||
| PAPIST19 | -.33(.08) | .00 | -.25, −.62 | .49 (.8) | .00 | .28, .78 | -.23 (.06) | .00 | -.14, −.54 |
| Job reattachment | -.29 (03) | .00 | -.22, −.39 | .35 (.04) | .00 | .24, .49 | |||
| Health support Climate | .42 (05) | .00 | .38, .89 | ||||||
| Indirect effect of PAPIST19 on Emotional Exhaustion via Job reattachment | .11 (.04) | .00 | .05, .22 | ||||||
| Indirect effect of PAPIST19 on Job engagement via Job reattachment | -.15 (.03) | .00 | -.12, −.29 | ||||||
| PAPIST19 * Health Support Climate on Job reattachment | .22 (.05) | .00 | .14, .32 | ||||||
| PAPIST19 * Health Support Climate on Job reattachment on Emotional Exhaustion via Job reattachment | -.03 (.02) | .05 | -.01, −.07 | ||||||
| PAPIST19 * Health Support Climate on Job reattachment on Job engagement via Job reattachment | -.07 (.02) | .00 | -.01, −.12 | ||||||
Sample size (N) = 283.
Fig. 2Interaction of plot Health support climate.