Work Stress in the Nursing Profession : An Evaluation of Organizational Causal Attribution

The goal of this study was to examine the role of organizational causal attribution in understanding the relation of work stressors (work-role overload, excessive role responsibility, and unpleasant physical environment) and personal resources (social support and cognitive coping) to such organizational-attitudinal outcomes as work engagement, turnover intention, and organizational identification. In some analyses, cognitive coping was also treated as an organizational outcome. Causal attribution was conceptualized in terms of four dimensions: internality-externality, attributing the cause of one’s successes and failures to oneself, as opposed to external factors, stability (thinking that the cause of one’s successes and failures is stable over time), globality (perceiving the cause to be operative on many areas of one’s life), and controllability (believing that one can control the causes of one’s successes and failures). Several hypotheses were derived from Karasek’s (1989) Job Demands–Control (JD-C) model and from the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) model (Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner & Schaufeli, 2001). Based on the JD-C model, a number of moderation effects were predicted, stating that the strength of the association of work stressors with the outcome variables (e.g. turnover intentions) varies as a function of the causal attribution; for example, unpleasant work environment is more strongly associated with turnover intention among those with an external locus of causality than among those with an internal locuse of causality. From the JD-R model, a number of hypotheses on the mediation model were derived. They were based on two processes posited by the model: an energy-draining process in which work stressors along with a mediating effect of causal attribution for failures deplete the nurses’ energy, leading to turnover intention, and a motivational process in which personal resources along with a mediating effect of causal attribution for successes foster the nurses’ engagement in their work, leading to higher organizational identification and to decreased intention to leave the nursing job. For instance, it was expected that the relationship between work stressors and turnover intention could be explained (mediated) by a tendency to attribute one’s work failures to stable causes. The data were collected from among Finnish hospital nurses using e-questionnaires. Overall 934 nurses responded the questionnaires. Work stressors and personal resources were measured by five scales derived from the Occupational Stress Inventory-Revised (Osipow, 1998). Causal attribution was measured using the Occupational Attributional Style Questionnaire (Furnham, 2004). Work engagement was assessed through the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (Schaufeli & al., 2002), turnover intention by the Van Veldhoven & Meijman (1994) scale, and organizational identification by the Mael & Ashforth (1992) measure. The results provided support for the function of causal attribution in the overall work stress process. Findings related to the moderation model can be divided into three main findings. First, external locus of causality along with job level moderated the relationship between work overload and cognitive coping. Hence, this interaction was evidenced only among nurses in non-supervisory positions. Second, external locus of causality and job level together moderated the relationship between physical environment and turnover intention. An opposite pattern of interaction was found for this interaction: among nurses, externality exacerbated the effect of perceived unpleasantness of the physical environment on turnover intention, whereas among supervisors internality produced the same effect. Third, job level also disclosed a moderation effect for controllability attribution over the relationship between physical environment and cognitive coping. Findings related to the mediation model for the energetic process indicated that the partial model in which work stressors have also a direct effect on turnover intention fitted the data better. In the mediation model for the motivational process, an intermediate mediation effect in which the effects of personal resources on turnover intention went through two mediators (e.g., causal dimensions and organizational identification) fitted the data better. All dimensions of causal attribution appeared to follow a somewhat unique pattern of mediation effect not only for energetic but also for motivational processes. Overall findings on mediation models partly supported the two simultaneous underlying processes proposed by the JD-R model. While in the energetic process the dimension of externality mediated the relationship between stressors and turnover partially, all the dimensions of causal attribution appeared to entail significant mediator effects in the motivational process. The general findings supported the moderation effect and the mediation effect of causal attribution in the work stress process. The study contributes to several research traditions, including the interaction approach, the JD-C, and the JD-R models. However, many potential functions of organizational causal attribution are yet to be evaluated by relevant academic and organizational research. Keywords: organizational causal attribution, optimistic / pessimistic attributional style, work stressors, organisational stress process, stressors in nursing profession, hospital nursing, JD-R model, personal resources, turnover intention, work engagement, organizational identification.

Evaluation of driving ability of the disabled persons in the context of the psychological activity theory

In the future the number of the disabled drivers requiring a special evaluation of their driving ability will increase due to the ageing population, as well as the progress of adaptive technology. This places pressure on the development of the driving evaluation system. Despite quite intensive research there is still no consensus concerning what is the factual situation in a driver evaluation (methodology), which measures should be included in an evaluation (methods), and how an evaluation has to be carried out (practise). In order to find answers to these questions we carried out empirical studies, and simultaneously elaborated upon a conceptual model for driving and a driving evaluation. The findings of empirical studies can be condensed into the following points: 1) A driving ability defined by the on-road driving test is associated with different laboratory measures depending on the study groups. Faults in the laboratory tests predicted faults in the on-road driving test in the novice group, whereas slowness in the laboratory predicted driving faults in the experienced drivers group. 2) The Parkinson study clearly showed that even an experienced clinician cannot reliably accomplish an evaluation of a disabled person’s driving ability without collaboration with other specialists. 3) The main finding of the stroke study was that the use of a multidisciplinary team as a source of information harmonises the specialists’ evaluations. 4) The patient studies demonstrated that the disabled persons themselves, as well as their spouses, are as a rule not reliable evaluators. 5) From the safety point of view, perceptible operations with the control devices are not crucial, but correct mental actions which the driver carries out with the help of the control devices are of greatest importance. 6) Personality factors including higher-order needs and motives, attitudes and a degree of self-awareness, particularly a sense of illness, are decisive when evaluating a disabled person’s driving ability. Personality is also the main source of resources concerning compensations for lower-order physical deficiencies and restrictions. From work with the conceptual model we drew the following methodological conclusions: First, the driver has to be considered as a holistic subject of the activity, as a multilevel hierarchically organised system of an organism, a temperament, an individuality, and a personality where the personality is the leading subsystem from the standpoint of safety. Second, driving as a human form of a sociopractical activity, is also a hierarchically organised dynamic system. Third, in an evaluation of driving ability it is a question of matching these two hierarchically organised structures: a subject of an activity and a proper activity. Fourth, an evaluation has to be person centred but not disease-, function- or method centred. On the basis of our study a multidisciplinary team (practitioner, driving school teacher, psychologist, occupational therapist) is recommended for use in demanding driver evaluations. Primary in a driver’s evaluations is a coherent conceptual model while concrete methods of evaluations may vary. However, the on-road test must always be performed if possible.