[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Only a minority of 18% did not have a special occupational education related tothe hotel business.The third sample consisted of 250 participants employed in 14 call centres ofvarious firms with an overall response rate of 50%.This sample consisted ofemployees who all had voice-to-voice contacts with clients: 75% were female;the average age was 31 years; 74% had a high school diploma (Abitur) or somekind of university degree; 76% received calls but did not call clients themselves(inbound), the others mostly both called clients and received calls (inbound andoutbound; details in Isic, Dormann, & Zapf, in press).ProcedureIn Study 1, we first developed a list of items covering the constructs of emotionwork described earlier.Then we gave a first draft of the questionnaire to nursesand social education workers who gave feedback with regard to the applicabilityand comprehensibility of the items.This process was repeated and the resultingquestionnaire was administered to the first sample.Starting with this version andthe first empirical results of Sample 1, a version of the questionnaire wasdeveloped for the hotel business sample.During this process it became clear that EMOTION WORK 387part of the developed items were domain specific, whereas another part seemedto be applicable for a variety of professions.In the hotel business, the first draft ofthe questionnaire was discussed with 10 persons from various service branches.They received the questionnaire and were also interviewed.A revised versionwas then applied to a sample of hotel service students (n=26).These studentswere asked to fill in the questionnaire and to comment on the applicability andcomprehensibility of the items.These comments and the psychometric results ledto the final version used for the hotel sample.This version consisted of domainspecific and general items.The general items of Sample 2 and some newlydeveloped general items were applied in the third sample.Here, the questionnairewas much shorter than in the previous versions, because it was intended todevelop a short instrument which can be applied in all areas with person-relatedwork and which can be used as a supplement to other job stress instruments.InstrumentsTo assess the construct validity of emotion work, several other variables wereincluded in the study.Job satisfaction was measured by the Kunin-item in Study 2.According toWanous, Reichers, and Hudy (1997), a reliability of 0.57 was assumed for thissingle-item measure.In the other studies a job satisfaction scale developed bySemmer and Baillod, (1991) was used.It consisted of the Kunin item and variousother items which were developed on the background of the job satisfactionmodel of Bruggemann (1974).High scores mean satisfaction, low scores meandissatisfaction including a resigned attitude towards one s job.Psychosomatic complaints, irritation, and self-esteem were measured usingscales developed by Mohr (1986, 1991).The psychosomatic complaints scaleconsisted of a list of 20 psychosomatic symptoms such as nervousness,headaches, tension, high blood pressure, and insomnia.Irritation consisted ofitems referring to anger and not being able to stop thinking about one s work.Finally, self-esteem was measured with items like I am proud of myachievements .The pychosomatic complaints and self-esteem items wereanswered on a 5-point scale, whereas a 7-point scale was used for irritation.Burnout (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accom-plishment) was measured using the Maslach Burnout Inventory Germanversion of Büssing and Perrar (1992).Emotional exhaustion measures one sfeeling of being burnt out, frustrated, and perceiving working with people to bevery demanding.Depersonalization comprises the tendency to treat clients likeobjects and to become indifferent and apathetic with regard to clients.ReducedPersonal Accomplishment includes the feeling of having reduced energy to do 388 ZAPF ET AL.things and of not being able to meet one s aspirations.The burnout items wereanswered on a 7-point scale.The descriptive data of the scales used for validationpurposes are summarized in Table 1.RESULTSIn the first study, because of sample size, we used exploratory factor analysesEFA (principal components analyses and varimax rotation) to test whether theitems behaved as predicted by the theoretical concept.In the second and thirdstudy we applied confirmatory factor analyses CFA using LISREL 8.3 ofJöreskog and Sörbom (1993), however, also in an exploratory manner.Theresults of Study 1 were used as starting models.For Study 1, EFA showed that the items for emotional requirements loaded onthree factors
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]