不是如果,而是它们如何不同:倦怠和敬业的法理学网络的元分析测试

Daniel D. Goering , Akihito Shimazu , Feigu Zhou , Tyki Wada , Ryutaro Sakai
{"title":"不是如果,而是它们如何不同:倦怠和敬业的法理学网络的元分析测试","authors":"Daniel D. Goering ,&nbsp;Akihito Shimazu ,&nbsp;Feigu Zhou ,&nbsp;Tyki Wada ,&nbsp;Ryutaro Sakai","doi":"10.1016/j.burn.2017.05.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The distinctiveness between work engagement and burnout has long been an issue of debate. To address this issue, we use a recently developed technique by Yu et al. (2016) to specify and test a meta-analytic structural equation model (MASEM) which accounts for the non-independence between engagement and burnout as well as the simultaneous effects of all relationships in our model, based on job demands-resources (JD-R) theory. We also estimate the degree of variability of these relationships across subpopulations. We report the findings as a distribution of effect size estimates—each estimate in the distribution representing the true effect size for a potential subpopulation—around the mean average estimate for each relationship in the model. Based on the findings, we conclude that overall burnout and engagement display empirically distinct relationships within the JD-R model (i.e., they are not antipodal), particularly in terms of antecedents. Perhaps most interestingly, rather than a polar opposite pattern of relationships, challenge demands have a similarly positive relationship to <em>both</em> burnout (<em>ß</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.35, SD<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.10) <em>and</em> engagement (<em>ß</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.35, SD<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.08), suggesting that challenge demands simultaneously lead—in equal force—to both engagement and burnout. In addition, the distributions of effect sizes are nearly identical for both relationships. As expected, hindrance demands have a positive relationship with burnout (<em>ß</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.31, SD<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.10) and have a relatively weak, negative relationship on average to engagement (<em>ß</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->−0.07, SD<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.07); work resources have a negative relationship with burnout (<em>ß</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->−0.15, SD<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.06) and are positively related to engagement, but in absolute terms they are a stronger predictor of engagement (<em>ß</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.33, SD<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.05). In terms of outcomes, burnout and engagement predict a variety of behavioral and attitudinal outcomes differentially from one another, although the differences are less clear due to wide variation in effect sizes in the population. Future research directions are discussed alongside practical implications.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":90459,"journal":{"name":"Burnout research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.burn.2017.05.003","citationCount":"48","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Not if, but how they differ: A meta-analytic test of the nomological networks of burnout and engagement\",\"authors\":\"Daniel D. Goering ,&nbsp;Akihito Shimazu ,&nbsp;Feigu Zhou ,&nbsp;Tyki Wada ,&nbsp;Ryutaro Sakai\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.burn.2017.05.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The distinctiveness between work engagement and burnout has long been an issue of debate. To address this issue, we use a recently developed technique by Yu et al. (2016) to specify and test a meta-analytic structural equation model (MASEM) which accounts for the non-independence between engagement and burnout as well as the simultaneous effects of all relationships in our model, based on job demands-resources (JD-R) theory. We also estimate the degree of variability of these relationships across subpopulations. We report the findings as a distribution of effect size estimates—each estimate in the distribution representing the true effect size for a potential subpopulation—around the mean average estimate for each relationship in the model. Based on the findings, we conclude that overall burnout and engagement display empirically distinct relationships within the JD-R model (i.e., they are not antipodal), particularly in terms of antecedents. Perhaps most interestingly, rather than a polar opposite pattern of relationships, challenge demands have a similarly positive relationship to <em>both</em> burnout (<em>ß</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.35, SD<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.10) <em>and</em> engagement (<em>ß</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.35, SD<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.08), suggesting that challenge demands simultaneously lead—in equal force—to both engagement and burnout. In addition, the distributions of effect sizes are nearly identical for both relationships. As expected, hindrance demands have a positive relationship with burnout (<em>ß</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.31, SD<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.10) and have a relatively weak, negative relationship on average to engagement (<em>ß</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->−0.07, SD<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.07); work resources have a negative relationship with burnout (<em>ß</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->−0.15, SD<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.06) and are positively related to engagement, but in absolute terms they are a stronger predictor of engagement (<em>ß</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.33, SD<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.05). In terms of outcomes, burnout and engagement predict a variety of behavioral and attitudinal outcomes differentially from one another, although the differences are less clear due to wide variation in effect sizes in the population. Future research directions are discussed alongside practical implications.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":90459,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Burnout research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.burn.2017.05.003\",\"citationCount\":\"48\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Burnout research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221305861630050X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Burnout research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221305861630050X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 48

摘要

长期以来,工作投入和职业倦怠之间的差异一直是一个有争议的问题。为了解决这个问题,我们使用Yu等人(2016)最近开发的技术来指定和测试一个元分析结构方程模型(MASEM),该模型基于工作需求-资源(JD-R)理论,解释了敬业度和倦怠之间的非独立性以及我们模型中所有关系的同时影响。我们还估计了这些关系在亚种群中的变异性程度。我们将研究结果报告为效应大小估计的分布——分布中的每个估计代表潜在亚群的真实效应大小——围绕模型中每个关系的平均估计。基于这些发现,我们得出结论,总体倦怠和敬业度在JD-R模型中表现出明显的经验关系(即,它们不是对立的),特别是在前因方面。也许最有趣的是,挑战需求与职业倦怠(ß = 0.35, SD = 0.10)和敬业度(ß = 0.35, SD = 0.08)之间的关系并非截然相反,而是相似的正相关关系,这表明挑战需求同时对敬业度和职业倦怠产生同等的影响。此外,两种关系的效应值分布几乎相同。正如预期的那样,障碍需求与倦怠呈显著正相关(ß = 0.31, SD = 0.10),与敬业呈显著负相关(ß = - 0.07, SD = 0.07);工作资源与倦怠呈负相关(ß = - 0.15, SD = 0.06),与敬业度呈正相关,但从绝对值来看,它们是敬业度的更强预测因子(ß = 0.33, SD = 0.05)。就结果而言,倦怠和投入预测了彼此不同的各种行为和态度结果,尽管由于人群中效应大小的差异很大,差异不太明显。讨论了未来的研究方向和实际意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Not if, but how they differ: A meta-analytic test of the nomological networks of burnout and engagement

The distinctiveness between work engagement and burnout has long been an issue of debate. To address this issue, we use a recently developed technique by Yu et al. (2016) to specify and test a meta-analytic structural equation model (MASEM) which accounts for the non-independence between engagement and burnout as well as the simultaneous effects of all relationships in our model, based on job demands-resources (JD-R) theory. We also estimate the degree of variability of these relationships across subpopulations. We report the findings as a distribution of effect size estimates—each estimate in the distribution representing the true effect size for a potential subpopulation—around the mean average estimate for each relationship in the model. Based on the findings, we conclude that overall burnout and engagement display empirically distinct relationships within the JD-R model (i.e., they are not antipodal), particularly in terms of antecedents. Perhaps most interestingly, rather than a polar opposite pattern of relationships, challenge demands have a similarly positive relationship to both burnout (ß = 0.35, SD = 0.10) and engagement (ß = 0.35, SD = 0.08), suggesting that challenge demands simultaneously lead—in equal force—to both engagement and burnout. In addition, the distributions of effect sizes are nearly identical for both relationships. As expected, hindrance demands have a positive relationship with burnout (ß = 0.31, SD = 0.10) and have a relatively weak, negative relationship on average to engagement (ß = −0.07, SD = 0.07); work resources have a negative relationship with burnout (ß = −0.15, SD = 0.06) and are positively related to engagement, but in absolute terms they are a stronger predictor of engagement (ß = 0.33, SD = 0.05). In terms of outcomes, burnout and engagement predict a variety of behavioral and attitudinal outcomes differentially from one another, although the differences are less clear due to wide variation in effect sizes in the population. Future research directions are discussed alongside practical implications.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Narratives of burnout and recovery from an agency perspective: A two-year longitudinal study Burnout risk profiles among French psychologists Study engagement and burnout profiles among Finnish higher education students Statewide improvement approach to clinician burnout: Findings from the baseline year Fear of future violence at work and job burnout: A diary study on the role of psychological violence and job control
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1