| Literature DB >> 36211882 |
Benqing Li1,2, Yajie Qiao2.
Abstract
Emotional labor generally exists in organization members. Emotional labor will not only affect employees' interpersonal relationships, but also affect employees' mental health. Affected by many factors such as the economic environment, they often need to bear multiple pressures. The degree of stress is positively correlated with the depth of the development of the times and people's education. As mental health research has become the frontier and hot spot in the field of psychology, the role of mental health in the process of employee creativity has been paid more and more attention. Therefore, this paper proposes a study on the causes of employees' psychological stress based on emotional feature clustering. Based on the clustering of emotional characteristics, this paper analyzes the causes of employees' mental health stress from an economic perspective. For teams with low level of team openness, with the improvement of team heterogeneity, team task performance shows a slight upward trend. It is clear from the experiment that when the number of experiments reaches 100, the task performance of high atmosphere level is 12.14, while the task performance of low atmosphere level is only 9.89. Therefore, the atmosphere of team employees is very important to team task performance. Through the cluster analysis of employees' mental health characteristics, it not only increases employees' spare time life, but also reduces employees' daily contradictions. It eases the work pressure of employees, and becomes a platform for employees to improve their awareness and a promoter of harmonious employee relations.Entities:
Keywords: causes of psychological stress; economics; emotional clustering; enterprise employees; mental health
Year: 2022 PMID: 36211882 PMCID: PMC9537101 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.990203
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1Based on the conceptual model of the relationship between characteristic emotional psychological factors and information-related performance.
Figure 2Labor market of enterprise employees.
Analysis and reliability test of employees’ learning performance.
| Item | Corrected item-total correlation | Alpha if tem deleted | Alpha |
|---|---|---|---|
| ELP1 | 0.621 | 0.826 | 0.848 |
| ELP2 | 0.581 | 0.832 | |
| ELP3 | 0.616 | 0.826 | |
| ELP4 | 0.588 | 0.831 |
Reliability analysis results of measurement scale.
| Variable | Measurement item | Alpha |
|---|---|---|
| Attitude towards diversity | 11 | 0.92 |
| Employee learning performance | 8 | 0.83 |
| Perception difference | 9 | 0.81 |
| Communication effectiveness | 14 | 0.93 |
Analysis and reliability test of individual innovative behavior.
| Item | Corrected item-total correlation | Alpha if tem deleted | Alpha |
|---|---|---|---|
| EIB1 | 0.825 | 0.911 | 0.928 |
| EIB2 | 0.792 | 0.916 | |
| EIB3 | 0.764 | 0.921 | |
| EIB4 | 0.781 | 0.917 |
Figure 3Adjustment of employee and team task performance in enterprises with heterogeneous attitudes.
Figure 4Adjustment of team open enterprise employee and team task performance.
Cluster purity and F value expressed by emotional features.
| Number of topics | 40 | 50 | 60 | 70 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Purity | 0.6312 | 0.6486 | 0.6524 | 0.6784 |
| 0.6214 | 0.6312 | 0.6402 | 0.6747 | |
| Number of topics | 80 | 100 | 110 | 120 |
| Purity | 0.6873 | 0.6796 | 0.6724 | 0.6605 |
| F value | 0.6730 | 0.6691 | 0.6682 | 0.6596 |
Purity and F value of clusters under different characteristic representations.
| Experiment purity | Boolean representation | Clustering representation of affective features | Expression of characteristic emotion tendency | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Only 0 | O + SO | O + SO(*) | |||
| 0.6546 | 0.6873 | 0.7052 | 0.7934 | 0.8122 | |
| Experiment | 0.6214 | 0.6730 | 0.6846 | 0.7545 | 0.7805 |
Figure 5Distribution of emotional intensity under the control dimension.
Figure 6Variation of reliability coefficient under different items.
Figure 7Mean change under different items.
Correlation coefficient matrix of each feature.
| 1 | −0.23 | 0.43 | −0.55 |
|---|---|---|---|
| −0.23 | 1 | −0.27 | 0.48 |
| 0.43 | −0.27 | 1 | −0.15 |
| −0.55 | −0.48 | −0.15 | 1 |
Figure 8Changes of employees’ emotional commitment and job performance level with age.