Personality and Job Burnout

1. Can Coping Skills Reduce Job Burnout? Preliminary Analyses Ronald G. Downey, Leon H. Rappoport, Amy E. McCabe, Michael J. Tagler, and Scott H. Hemenover Kansas State University June 2002 Funded by the Office of Naval Research, Grant #N00014-01-1-0917 Personality and Job Burnout

2. Why Job Burnout? • Health is a major issue in the workplace • Stress is one of the top-ten health problems at work • Stress is related to a variety of health problems (e.g., hypertension) • Job stress (burnout) is related to turnover

3. Definition of Job Burnout • Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey Maslach, Jackson, and Leiter (1996) • Emotional Exhaustion - the depletion of emotional resources • Cynicism - distant attitude towards work • Professional Efficacy (diminished) - expectations of continued success at work

4. Antecedents of Job BurnoutCordes and Dougherty (1993) • Job and Role Characteristics (e.g., role overload) • Personal Characteristics (e.g., gender) • Organizational Characteristics (e.g., organizational climate)

5. “Big Five” Personality TraitsCosta and McCrae (1992) • Neuroticism- individuals who experience negative affects • Extroversion – individuals who are sociable, assertive, etc. • Openness to Experience – individuals who have have active imaginations and are attentive to their inner feelings • Agreeableness - individuals who are fundamentally altruistic, sympathetic to others, and eager to help • Conscientiousness - individuals who are purposeful, strong-willed, etc.

6. Core Self-Evaluation (CSE)Judge and Bono (2001) • A higher-order self-evaluative personality trait composed of: • Self-Esteem • Generalized Self-Efficacy • Neuroticism (Emotional Stability) • Locus of Control • CSE is positively related to job satisfaction and performance

7. Personality and Job Burnout • Past research has emphasized situational factors in job burnout • Personality factors also influence job burnout: • Neuroticism is associated with higher levels of burnout • Agreeableness is associated with lower levels of burnout (Gaylord, 2001) • CSE is associated with lower levels of job burnout (Tagler, McCabe, Downey, Hemenover, & Rappoport, 2002)

8. Coping With Job Burnout (Latack, 1986; Leiter, 1991) • Control versus Escape Coping • Control coping is dealing directly with a problem to resolve it • Escape coping is dealing with the emotions resulting from a problem

9. General Coping Techniques • Problem solving • Planning actions, evaluating alternatives, seeking social support • Positive thinking • Maintaining a positive attitude, imagery, and self-talk • Palliative measures • Muscle relaxation, deep breathing, and meditation

10. Personality and Coping with Burnout(Gaylord, 2001) • In an instructor-only sample, personality was related to the effectiveness of different coping strategies: • Neuroticism • Social support • Level of effort • Agreeableness • Escape coping mechanisms

11. HypothesesGaylord (2001); Tagler et al. (2002) • CSE-specific training in coping should reduce job burnout compared to general (non-CSE specific) training • CSE-specific training and general training should reduce burnout compared to no training

12. Design Overview • The longitudinal study took place in four phases: • Pre-test (Fall, 2001): Ps provided information for screening and group assignment • Training (February, 2002): Ps completed questionnaires and underwent burnout-coping training • Online Journal Completion (March-April, 2002): Ps completed online questionnaires (bi-weekly) • Post-test (April-May, 2002): Ps completed final measures of coping, burnout, etc.

13. Design-Training All 4 groups attended two training sessions: • Group 1: Control (No coping training) • Session one: Completed questionnaires • Session two: Received instructions on completing online journals

14. Design-Training (cont’d.) • Group 2: General burnout coping training • Session one: • Completed questionnaires • Video and discussion of general coping techniques (e.g., positive imagery and self-talk, stretching, deep breathing) • Session two: • Reviewed session one training • Received instructions on completing online journals

15. Design-Training (cont’d.) • Group 3: Low CSE-Specific Coping Training • Session one: • Completed questionnaires • Video and discussion of general coping techniques (e.g., positive imagery and self-talk, stretching, deep breathing) • Session two: • Encouraged social support in coping with job burnout (Gaylord, 2001) • Received instructions on completing online journals

16. Design-Training (cont’d.) • Group 4: High CSE-Specific Coping Training: • Session one: • Completed questionnaires • Video and discussion of general coping techniques (e.g., positive imagery and self-talk, stretching, deep breathing) • Session two: • Encouraged increased effort in coping with job burnout (Gaylord, 2001) • Reviewed instructions on completing online journals

17. Method-Participants • 101 employed students (from an original sample of 309 students, 32.7%) completed all phases of the study • Participants were assigned to one of four training groups • Control (N=27) • General Training (N=28) • Low CSE Training (N=22) • High CSE Training (N=24)

18. Method-Measures • Maslach Burnout Inventory – GS (Maslach et al., 1996) • Control-Escape Coping Scale (Latack, 1986) • CSE Scales: • NEO Five Factor Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992) • Self-Esteem (Rosenberg, 1965) • Self-Efficacy (Judge, Locke, Durham, & Kluger, 1998) • Locus of Control (Levenson, 1981) • Life Satisfaction (Diener, 1985) • Optimism (Scheier & Carver, 1985) • Positive and Negative Affect Scales (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988)

19. Analyses • Analysis of Attrition • Ps who did not complete the study were not found to differ in terms of personality, employment, and demographic variables from those who did. • CSE and Burnout : (N=305) • Emotional Exhaustion r = -.31 • Professional Efficacy r = .35 • Cynicism r = -.31

20. Training Analyses Emotional Exhaustion • 4 (experimental group) X 3 (time) repeated measures ANOVA • No significant effect of • TimeF (2,194) = 0.627, NS. • GroupF (3,97) = 2.00, NS. • Time X Group InteractionF (6,194) = 1.75, NS.

21. Emotional Exhaustion as a Function of Training Group Over Time

22. Training Analyses (cont’d.) Professional Efficacy • 4 (experimental group) X 3 (time) repeated measures ANOVA on efficacy scores • No significant effect of • TimeF (2,194) = 0.11, NS. • Time X Group InteractionF (6,194) = 0.83, NS. • Significant effect of group F (3,97) = 3.53, p < .05, 2=.10, power =.77 • Low CSE Ps report less efficacy than High CSE Ps

23. Professional Efficacy as a Function of Training Group Over Time

24. Training Analyses (cont’d.) Cynicism • 4 (experimental group) X 3 (time) repeated measures ANOVA on cynicism scores • No significant effect of • TimeF (2,192) = 0.63, NS. • Time X Group InteractionF (6,192) = 1.88, NS. • Significant effect of Group F (3,96) = 5.66, p<.05, 2=.15, power =.94. • Low CSE Ps more cynical than High CSE Ps

25. Cynicism as a Function of Training Group Over Time

26. Exploratory Analyses • Job Burnout values changed -- Test-Retest Reliabilities: • Emotional Exhaustion rtt = .66 • Professional Efficacy rtt = .68 • Cynicism rtt = .73

27. Exploratory Analyses (cont.) • Predicting Changes Time 1 to Time 3: • Emotional Exhaustion – Low Core group had a greater decrease. • Professional Efficacy – Individuals using Cognitive Reappraisal Coping had a larger increase. • Cynicism – No differences found.

28. Exploratory Analyses (cont.) • Predicting Changes Time 2 to Time 3: • Emotional Exhaustion – No differences found. • Professional Efficacy – High core group showed more increases. • Cynicism – The General Training Group had more increases.

29. Summary • Personality (CSE) is significantly and consistently related to job burnout. • However, stress coping training was not found to significantly reduce job burnout. • Exploratory analyses suggested that burnout was changing in a consistent fashion related to training group and coping strategies.

30. Current Focus • Do stress appraisal, coping style, and emotions relate to personality and burnout, and if so, how? • Do these variables serve as moderators or mediators? • Can we use these variables to better design burnout interventions?

31. Future Analyses • Further Exploratory Analyses • What predicts changes in Burnout? • Are coping behaviors related to CSE and Burnout? • Journal Data • How stable are stress appraisal / coping style? • Did our stress training impact these processes? • Can we improve our prediction and prevention of burnout?

32. Future Analyses (continued) • Positive Psychology Measures • Can measures of life satisfaction / positive emotionality increase our understanding of the relations between personality and job burnout? • Job type, personality, and burnout (Theis, 2002) • Are certain individuals more likely to experience burnout in certain occupations? • Should we tailor burnout interventions based on both job type and personality factors?

33. Potential Issues • Are we blaming the victims? • Is it once again the nature versus nurture argument? • If we cannot train coping skills, do we select on personality traits?

34. References Cordes, C.L., & Dougherty, T.W. (1993). A review and an integration of research on job burnout. Academy of Management Review, 18, 321-656. Costa, P. T. & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised neo personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and ) NEO-FFI) inventory professional manual. Odessa, FL: PAR. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75. Gaylord, T. W. (2001). The moderating effects of coping strategies on the relationship between situational and personality factors and job burnout. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Kansas State University, Manhattan KS. Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluation traits--self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—With job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 80-92. Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., Durham, C. C., & Kluger, A. N. (1998). Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core self-evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 17-34. Latack, J. C. (1986). Coping with job stress: Measures and future directions for scale development. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 377-385. Leiter, M. P. (1991). Coping patterns as predictors of burnout: the function of control and escapist coping patterns. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12, 123-144. Levenson, H. (1981). Differentiating among internality, powerful others, and chance. In H. M. Lefcourt (Ed.) Research with the locus of control construct (pp. 15-63). New York: Academic Press. Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). Maslach Burnout Inventory Manual (3rd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health: Assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology, 4, 219-247. Tagler, M. J., McCabe, A. E., Downey, R. G., Hemenover, S. H., & Rappoport, L. (2002). Core self-evaluations predict job burnout. Paper accepted for presentation to the Midwest Psychological Association. Theis, B. (2002, April). Burnout: Does the type of job make a difference? Paper presented at the Eighteenth Annual Undergraduate Psychology Research Convocation at Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas. Watson, D., Clark, L., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.