Next Article in Journal
Spatial-Temporal Differentiation Analysis of Agricultural Land Use Intensity and Its Driving Factors at the County Scale: A Case Study in Hubei Province, China
Previous Article in Journal
Construction of the Infection Curve of Local Cases of COVID-19 in Hong Kong using Back-Projection
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Burnout and Time Perspective of Blue-Collar Workers at the Shipyard

by
Sarah Detaille
1,2,
Adela Reig-Botella
1,2,*,
Miguel Clemente
2,
Jaime López-Golpe
2 and
Annet De Lange
1,2,3,4,5
1
Department of Human Resource Management, HAN University of Applied Sciences in Nijmegen, 6525EJ Nijmegen, The Netherlands
2
Department of Psychology, Universidade da Coruna, 15701 A Coruña, Spain
3
Faculty of Psychology, Open University Heerlen, 6419 AT Heerlen, The Netherlands
4
Norwegian School of Hotel Management, University of Stavanger, 4021 Stavanger, Norway
5
Faculty of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(18), 6905; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186905
Submission received: 24 August 2020 / Revised: 14 September 2020 / Accepted: 18 September 2020 / Published: 21 September 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Occupational Safety and Health)

Abstract

:
Background: The aim of the research was to investigate the association between time perspective in relation to burnout and successful ageing of blue-collar workers with physically highly demanding work and low autonomy. Shipyard blue-collar workers usually do predominantly manual labor versus white-collar workers, whose jobs do not usually involve physical work. Methods: 497 participants workers in a shipyard in the north of Spain. Ages were between 20 and 69 (M = 46.62, SD = 10.79). We used the Zimbardo Time Perspective Instrument (ZTPI), Spanish version, and the Maslach Burnout Inventory–General Survey (MBI-GS). Results: Emotional exhaustion factor obtained a coefficient of 0.97; cynicism factor of 0.83; and professional efficacy factor of p = 0.86. The mean of the three reliability coefficients was 0.887. With respect to the five factors of the ZTPI questionnaire: the negative past factor obtained a coefficient of p = 0.91; that of positive past p = 0.81; the present hedonistic of 0.878; the future of p = 0.83; and the fatalistic present of p = 0.90. The mean of the five coefficients, was p = 0.86. Conclusions: Within shipyard workers, burnout is associated with a negative past and negative future time perspective. This makes shipyard workers at a higher risk of developing burnout and this can have serious consequences for the sustainable employability of these blue-collar workers.

1. Introduction

This paper focuses on the association between time perspective in relation to burnout and successful ageing of blue-collar shipyard workers in Spain with physically highly demanding work and low autonomy. This theme is important due to the ageing of the workforce, the increase in the retirement age in many western countries as well as that employers are motivated to prolong the working lives of their ageing workers.
The concept of time perspective of ageing shipyard workers in relation to burnout has so far received little research attention. Nonetheless, earlier research has pointed to the importance of examining time perspective, as it significantly influences a person’s judgments, decisions, and activities [1,2]. The working conditions within the shipyard are harsh. It is predominantly blue-collar work that is related to heavy manual and repetitive work. Shipyard workers are frequently exposed to noises of ventilation and machinery. Furthermore, the working conditions are difficult due to the high temperatures and air pollution due to the use of chemicals at the shipyard [3]. To investigate the influence of time perspective among these workers in relation to the possible development of burnout in blue-collar workers, we conducted a cross-sectional study among shipyard workers in the North of Spain. Before we address the specific research questions and hypotheses of the current study, we will pay more attention to the concept and related theory of future time perspective as well as burnout. A review found positive associations between a lower socioeconomic status (SES) indicated by income and level of education and a negative future time perspective as indicated by family income and level of education. Another study suggested that workers in higher social classes predominantly have a positive time perspective, as principal developmental tasks are more likely to be actualized at later life stages compared to those in lower social classes [4].
Zimbardo and Boyd [1] understood the term time perspective to be a propensity to concentrate on the specific time periods past, present and future, together with a favourable or unfavourable assessment of a particular length of time. They recognized five forms: Past positive standpoint: an inclination to concentrate on the positively appraised past; thinking about past events with pleasure, focusing mainly on the pleasant occurrences and collecting souvenirs from the past; Past negative standpoint: a propensity to concentrate on the negatively appraised past, to frequently remember sad incidents from the past. Principally, remembering distressing moments, traumas and dismay from the past [5].
Furthermore, Future standpoint: a propensity to look towards the future, formulate objectives to be met and undertakings to be done. People think about their own future with pleasure. Present hedonistic standpoint: a propensity to exploit enjoyment “here and now”; it is related to discounting experiences from the past; they often focus on pleasure as the major element in life, despite the chance involved. Present-fatalistic standpoint: a propensity to live in the present passively [6]; life depends on pre-destination, so all anyone can do is to exist in the present acquiescently.
According to Sobol-Kwapinska and Jankowski [5], it appears that a focus on the favourable past and future with an active emphasis on the present are areas which match the favourable aspects of human roles. Conversely, a fatalistic time perspective and a focus on an unfavourably viewed past are particularly negative. On the other hand, a balanced time perspective is an amalgam of a strong focus on a favourably assessed past, a medium focus on the future, a medium hedonistic focus on the present, scant fatalistic focus on the present, and scant focus on an unfavourably assessed past [1,2,5].
Sobol-Kwapinska et al. [6] mentioned that it is considered a major psychological variable related to several areas of human roles, for example well-being, healthy or risky behaviour, tendency for addictions, optimism, high self-esteem, risky driving, etc. [1,2,7,8,9].
Psychological temporality also has important effects on work experiences and emotional reactions, as well as behaviour at work [10,11,12]. In organizations, the five time perspectives pointed out by Zimbardo are important for understanding positive human behaviour, although the future perspective of time is one of the most important for explaining self-management behaviour at the workplace, like for example planning, decision making and motivation [12].
According to De Lange et al. [13], successful ageing at work is the self-management process of workers necessary to become and remain employable during their life course, indicating that employees are able to pro-actively recover and improve over time through self-management skills and actions, and with support or interventions from the work environment. Nonetheless, earlier research on successful ageing at work has pointed to the influence of changing time horizons of ageing workers and its possible impact on work motivation and outcomes.
Concerning psycho-social risk, job burnout is a condition of psychological and physical fatigue. Maslach and Jackson [14] explained it as long-lasting stress response of a person to protracted exposure to psychological and relationship stress factors in the working environment, which cover emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and decreased individual achievement.
Emotional exhaustion is the central quality of burnout, it refers to feelings of extreme psychological exhaustion and absence of eagerness and vigour towards work. Depersonalization refers to the intentional endeavour to distance oneself from work and the manifestation of uninvolved, emotionless, and distrustful sentiments towards co-workers. Personal accomplishment is displayed in a diminished feeling of self-respect and furthermore an unfavourable assessment of work, incapacity to feel pleasure, fulfilment, or a sense of achievement related to performing the task [15]. It is hard work to obtain a sense of achievement when being fatigued or when one is indifferent towards the people one is helping [16].
Based on the literature, six main domains are associated with increased burnout risk: high workload, lack of control, want of reward, need for sense of community, low fairness, and different values [17]. Job burnout is a frequent issue in companies and institutions, and often occurs in high-pressure environments [18]. Furthermore, quantitative job demands such as a high workload experienced and pressurised deadlines are consistently linked to burnout, just as qualitative job demands such as role conflict and role ambiguity [16] or the absence of rewards or emotional recognition [19]. Additionally, environmental factors such as occupational noise can also lead to hypertension and burnout of blue-collar workers [20]; it is also associated with higher occupational stress [21].
According to Demerouti et al. [22], burnout is identified by high levels of psychological fatigue and negative perspectives on one’s job (disengagement). There are other factors which can influence burnout: length of experience, role, employment sector and job satisfaction [23].
Job burnout often leads to indifference to others, has a bad effect on the employee, and has an unfavourable effect on the institution [24].
Emotional exhaustion has also been found to be a significant source of physical complaints, like headaches, exhaustion, gastrointestinal issues, respiratory problems, while psychological impacts include: insomnia, symptoms of depression, use of psychotropic drugs and antidepressants, symptoms of psychological ill-health [25]. Occupational stress is often associated with emotional exhaustion [26], which is a public health issue with negative outcomes which should be avoided in the workplace [27,28,29].
Past research has found an association between a negative past time perspective and fatalistic present and negative future orientation. The role of future perspective can be a limiting (negative time perspective) but also an enabling factor (in sense of positive time perspective) [30]. Paying attention to a positive time perspective in blue-collar workers can be interesting in the field of occupational health.
In the current research, the objective is to enhance the sustainable employability of blue-collar workers at the shipyard by focusing on the mental health of these workers. In this study, we want to analyse whether the risk of developing burnout is associated with the presentation of a specific type of personality, especially a way of understanding and facing life events (in terms of perceived time perspective).
We formulated the following hypotheses:
General hypothesis: people burned out at work are associated with a characteristic personality system based on negative past and fatalistic present.
In addition, three specific hypotheses were created:
Hypothesis 1: 
People with higher levels of emotional exhaustion will have a personality system defined by a predominance of the negative past and the fatalistic present, that is, a more negative interpretation of reality.
Hypothesis 2: 
Similarly, those subjects with higher levels of cynicism will also possess a personality system defined by a predominance of the negative past and the fatalistic present, that is, a more negative interpretation of reality.
Hypothesis 3: 
People who present higher levels of professional efficiency will possess a personality system characterized by a predominance of the hedonistic present, future, and positive past.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

The group of test subjects comprised 497 participants—367 men (73.8%); 130 women (26.2%)—who were workers in a shipyard in the north of Spain. The respondents were selected at random, they voluntarily agreed to participate in the study, they were given the questionnaire in person along with an informed consent form and they were asked to deliver the questionnaire within a few days. The questionnaire was only applied once. To be considered a completed questionnaire, the participant had to answer all questions on the questionnaire. This research was approved by the Ethic Committee of the Universidade da Coruna (Spain) on 22 October 2019 (69/19), organizational unit responsible for the protection of human participants.
The ages of the participants were between 20 and 69 (M = 46.62, SD = 10.79); the majority were between 38 and 55 years old. In addition to age and sex, the educational level was analysed: 15% (76 subjects) of the sample studied primary education, 50.5% (251 subjects) studied secondary education, 34.3% (170 subjects) attended university studies.
Concerning the employment situations, with respect to the types of contracts, 75.5% had a permanent contract, 11.7% a temporary contract, and 11.3% a work contract. With respect to seniority in the company, the majority were between 6 and 50 years old, with M = 19.15, Md = 17, SD = 14.26. Years of work experience, from 1 year to 50 years, M = 23.76, Md = 22 (between 14 and 35 years), SD = 12.5 (This description of the sample is summarized in Table 1).

2.2. Instruments

2.2.1. Zimbardo Time Perspective

The Zimbardo Time Perspective Instrument (ZTPI) [1] Spanish version [31] consists of 56 items and was used to calculate five dimensions of Time Perspective: the Past-Positive factor indicates a nostalgic view of the past (9 items, e.g., “It gives me pleasure to think about my past”); the Past-Negative factor reflects an often negative, unfavourable opinion of the past (10 items, e.g., “I think about the good things that I have missed out in my life”); the Present-Hedonistic factor indicates an enjoyment and pleasure-seeking, risk-taking perspective on time and life (15 items, e.g., “Taking risks keeps my life from becoming boring”); the Present-Fatalistic factor reflects a powerless and despairing outlook on the future and life, and a view the future is predetermined and not changed by personal current actions (9 items, e.g., “Fate determines much in my life”); and the Future factor indicates a general inclination towards the accomplishment of future objectives and is characterized by preparation and organization (13 items, e.g., “I believe that a person’s day should be planned ahead each morning”). The internal consistency of the questionnaire used was calculated for this research using the Cronbach’s Alpha index. Regarding the ZTPI questionnaire: the negative past factor obtained a coefficient of p = 0.91; that of positive past p = 0.81; the present hedonistic of p = 0.878; the future of p = 0.83; and the fatalistic present of p = 0.90. The mean of the five coefficients, therefore, was p = 0.86. Therefore, the reliability of the questionnaire, already verified by their corresponding authors, is adequate.

2.2.2. Burnout

We used the Maslach Burnout Inventory—General Survey MBI-GS [32], is a 15-item self-report measure of job burnout, which has three components: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and low personal accomplishment [33]. The items range from 0 (Never) to 6 (Every day). Sample items are “I have become less enthusiastic about my work”, “I have become more cynical about whether my work contributes anything” and “In my opinion, I am good at my job”. The internal consistency of the questionnaire used was calculated for this research using the Cronbach Alpha index. Regarding the MBI-GS questionnaire, the emotional exhaustion factor obtained a coefficient of 0.973; the cynicism factor of 0.833; and the professional efficacy factor of p = 0.86. Therefore, the mean of the three reliability coefficients was 0.887. Therefore, the reliability of the questionnaire, already verified by their corresponding authors, is adequate.

2.2.3. Data Analysis

The data was coded into an Excel Program spreadsheet, and then exported to the IBM SPSS Program, version 26 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA). Descriptive tests were requested to verify that the imported data was error-free. Next, the percentages of appearance of each category were determined in the case of the qualitative variables, and the statistics of central tendency in the case of the quantitative variables. The Alpha reliability index was also calculated using Pearson correlations both for the set of items on the Zimbardo ZTPI scale and for each of the subscales both on that scale and on the MBI-GS. Lastly, three linear regression analyses were performed, one for each of the variables of being burned out that make up each of the factors of the MBI-GS test (emotional exhaustion, cynicism and professional efficacy). The variables that make up the ZTPI personality test (negative past, present hedonistic, future, positive past, and present fatalistic) were considered as predictors. The tables of each regression analysis will allow us to determine which personality variables are present in those subjects who manifest a burnout phenomenon.

3. Results

Firstly, Pearson correlations between the study variables were also calculated. These correlations are listed in Table 2
As can be seen, there are high correlations between the subscales of each test, as well as between those of one test and another. Therefore, the relevant regression analyses were carried out, which are as follows.
Furthermore, linear regression statistical tests were carried out, in order to determine whether or not to verify the hypotheses. This information is reflected in Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5.
In Table 3, it can be seen that two of the variables of the analysis predict the emotional exhaustion factor: negative past and negative future. The latter predicts variability in a negative sense and coincides in its prediction with the negative past variable. Therefore, scoring highly in negative past is a predictor of emotional exhaustion. The linear regression performed presented an R coefficient of 0.396 (R2 = 0.157). The standard error of the estimate was 1.278, and significance occurred at 0.000.
Table 4 shows which variables from the time perspective are predictors of cynicism. In this case, the only variable that has a significant value is, as before, the negative past. Thus, the negative past predicts the two negative aspects that make up burnout. The linear regression performed showed an R coefficient of 0.332 (R2 = 0.110). The standard error of the estimate was 1.151, and significance occurred at 0.000.
The last of the regressions carried out (Table 5) focuses on the prediction of professional efficacy. In this case, there are two explanatory variables: again, the negative past, and positive future. Therefore, it is verified that the prediction of professional efficacy is related to positive ways of coping with time and the absence of negative views of the past.
Therefore, the results indicate how ways of considering time that emphasize the negative past predict the two negative aspects of burnout, while the positive future perspective favours the positive aspect in determining burnout: professional efficacy. The linear regression performed showed an R coefficient of 0.432 (R2 = 0.186; p < 0.01 or 0.05), values somewhat higher than those previously found. The standard error of the estimate was 0.917, and significance also occurred at 0.000.

4. Discussion

This study shows that shipyard workers from a large shipyard in the north of Spain have a higher risk of experiencing burnout (emotional exhaustion, personal-efficacy and cynicism), which was associated with a negative past and negative future time perspective. This higher risk of experiencing burnout can have serious consequences for the sustainable employability of blue-collar workers. The following hypotheses were accepted or rejected on the basis of these results;
Hypothesis 1: 
People with higher levels of emotional exhaustion will have a personality system characterized by a predominance of the negative past and the negative future, that is, a more negative interpretation of reality.
With regard to one of the identifying variables of being burned out at work, emotional exhaustion, the significant predictor variables were the negative past and the future, but in a negative way. The fatalistic present was not significant. Therefore, people with greater emotional exhaustion have a personality characterized by viewing a negative past and an absence of future.
Hypothesis 2: 
Similarly, those subjects with higher levels of cynicism will also possess a personality system characterized by a predominance of the negative past and the fatalistic present, that is, a more negative interpretation of reality.
The results are very similar to those obtained in the previous analysis, although slightly less significant. The only predictive personality variable was the negative past, just as it was in the previous analysis.
Hypothesis 3: 
People who present higher levels of professional efficiency will possess a personality system characterized by a predominance of the hedonistic present, future, and positive past.
The results show that professional efficacy variable is associated with a positive future and no negative past.
Firstly, the results of this study are similar to earlier research showing that a negative past orientation is associated with a negative present and future perception of the working situation. Studies have linked the past negative dimension to neuroticism [34] and to an increased negative mood [35]. In contrast, it can be assumed that past positive orientation will prevent burnout, because of its influence on the stability of the individual [2].
Secondly, a systematic review by Kooij et al. has found a positive association between a lower socioeconomic status (SES) and a negative future time perspective, as indicated by family income and level of education [4].
Thirdly, a positive association between a future time perspective and locus of control (ρ = 0.48, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.56), self-efficacy (ρ = 0.44, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.53), and self-esteem (ρ = 0.31, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.40), although the number of studies including locus of control was somewhat low (i.e., k < 10), and mainly used adolescent samples [4], and self-efficacy has been related to a higher risk of developing burnout [30]. The results showed that the Deviance from a Balanced Time Perspective (DBTP) is essential for burnout proneness, and that this influence is mediated by perceived stress and self-efficacy.
Fourth, and perhaps most importantly, our findings from earlier research showed that FTP may be modified to promote physical exercise, facilitate new skill learning, safe work behaviours, and long-term career planning [4]. Social cognitive theories propose that self-efficacy can stimulate a positive time perspective and can prevent burnout. This association has not yet been elaborated in the literature of occupational health prevention.
Admittedly, this study presents several limitations that restrict the generalization of the results. One of the limitations of this study is that we do not know if the associations with burnout are different between white collar workers and blue-collar workers, or even between countries. Earlier research in on the basis of a longitudinal study in Finland found that there were no differences between the groups. Furthermore, the job stressors were much the same in both groups [36].
Another limitation of this study is that the results are based on cross-sectional data instead of longitudinal data. Last but not least, as with all studies that involve the translation of a scale, it is possible that the equivalence problems detected are due to translation errors.
Nevertheless, this study gives insight into the possible factors that can influence exhaustion and burnout in shipyard workers. On the basis of this study, it is essential to train supervisors and workers of occupational health services at the shipyard to detect signs and symptoms of negative time perspective and lack of self-efficacy in order to prevent mental problems at the workplace. Further, it is important to analyse which working factors contribute to a negative past and negative future time perspective. Other studies have shown that a lack of autonomy and high exigency have contributed to high levels of stress and lack of job satisfaction in shipyard workers [28,29]. Earlier research has shown that blue-collar workers score lower in self-management skills than white collar workers [37]. Therefore, it is important to pay attention to the self-efficacy of blue-collar workers [13].
Furthermore, the hard environmental working conditions within the shipyard due to the constant exposure to high noises and badly ventilated areas have a negative effect on the mental and physical health of blue-collar shipyard workers [28]. Other studies point that physical work demands are a risk factor for a shortened expected working life [38] and that more men were exposed to low support at work and more physically demanding work than women [39].
These conditions should be taken into consideration in order to develop Human Resource instruments, work-disability prevention programs, and successful ageing at work practices [40] targeted at the shipyard. In addition, there is the need for organizational interventions on the basis of participatory interventions that involve employees in the process of actions taken at the workplace to improve working conditions. Together with measures to promote a healthy and safe workplace, we can conclude that more attention is needed for preventive measures to avoid mental problems due to a negative time perspective. Recent studies propose that interventions to restore the person–work fit at various levels (i.e., person, job, work group, organization, and society) should be finetuned to stimulate the self-regulation of workers [4].

5. Conclusions

This study shows that there is an association between experiencing burnout in the sense of (emotional exhaustion, personal efficacy and cynicism) and the variables negative past and negative future time perspective in shipyard workers from a large company in the north of Spain. These workers therefore have a higher risk of developing burnout, and this can have serious consequence for the sustainable employability of these workers. This study could also be of interest for other workers with highly physically and routine demanding jobs.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.D., A.R.-B. and M.C.; methodology, S.D., A.R.-B. and M.C.; validation, S.D., A.R.-B. and M.C.; formal analysis, M.C.; data curation, M.C.; writing—original draft preparation, A.R.-B., M.C. and S.D.; writing—review and editing, A.R.-B., S.D., M.C., A.D.L. and J.L.-G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Zimbardo, P.G.; Boyd, J.N. Putting time in perspective: A valid reliable individual differences metric. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1999, 77, 1271–1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Zimbardo, P.G.; Boyd, J.N. The time Paradox: The New Psychology of Time that will Change your Life; The Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  3. Lima da Silva, J.L.; Da Silva Soares, R.; Rangel Teixeira, E.; Vago Daher, D.; De Almeida, J.A.; Anjos de Almeida, J.H. Degree of stress among shipyard workers: Cross-sectional study. Online Braz. J. Nurs. 2016, 15, 61–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Kooij, D.T.A.M.; Kanfer, R.; Betts, M.; Rudolph, C.W. Future time perspective: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 2018, 103, 867–893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Sobol-Kwapinska, M.; Jankowski, T. Positive time: Balanced time perspective and positive orientation. J. Happiness Stud. 2016, 17, 1511–1528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Sobol-Kwapinska, M.; Jankowski, T.; Przepiorka, A.; Oinyshi, I.; Sorokowski, P.; Zimbardo, P. What is the structure of time? A study on time perspective in the United States, Poland, and Nigeria. Front. Psychol. 2018, 9, 2078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Zimbardo, P.; Keough, K.; Boyd, J.N. Present time perspective as a predictor of risky driving. Personal. Individ. Differ. 1997, 23, 1007–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Carelli, M.; Wiberg, B.; Wiberg, M. Development and construct validation of the Swedish Zimbardo time perspective inventory. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 2011, 27, 220–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Zhang, J.W.; Howell, R.T. Do time perspectives predict unique variance in life satisfaction beyond personality traits? Personal. Individ. Differ. 2011, 50, 1261–1266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Navarro, J.; Roe, R.A.; Artiles, M.I. Taking time seriously: Changing practices and perspectives in work/organizational psychology. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 2015, 31, 135–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Cernas-Ortiz, D.A.; Davis, M.A. Future and past negative time perspective influences on job satisfaction and organizational commitment in Mexico and the United States. Manag. Res. J. Iberoam. Acad. Manag. 2016, 14, 317–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Cernas-Ortiz, D.A.; Mercado-Salgado, P.; Davis, M.A. Perspectiva futura de tiempo, satisfacción laboral y compromiso organizacional: El efecto mediador de la autoeficacia, la esperanza y la vitalidad [Future time perspective, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment: The mediating effect of self-efficacy, hope, and vitality]. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 2018, 34, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. De Lange, A.H.; Furunes, T.; Buckens, A. Older Workers’ Self-Management and Sustainable Employability at Work: Lessons Learned from Science and Practice; Fideler, E., Ed.; Handbook of work and Aging; Rowman & Littlefield Publishers: Lanham, MD, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Maslach, C.; Jackson, S.E. The measurement of experienced burnout. J. Organ. Behav. 1981, 2, 99–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Peng, J.; Li, D.; Zhang, Z.; Tian, Y.; Miao, D.; Xiao, W.; Jiaxi, Z. How can core self-evaluations influence job burnout? The key roles of organizational commitment and job satisfaction. J. Health Psychol. 2016, 21, 50–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Maslach, C.; Schaufeli, W.B.; Leiter, M.P. Job burnout. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2001, 52, 397–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Maslach, C.; Leiter, M.P. Understanding the burnout experience: Recent research and its implications for Psychiatry. World Psychiatry 2016, 15, 103–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Gong, Z.; Chen, Y.; Wang, Y. The influence of emotional intelligence on job burnout and job performance: Mediating effect of psychological capital. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Golonka, K.; Gawlowska, M.; Mojsa-Kaja, J.; Marek, T. Psychophysiological characteristics of burnout syndrome: Resting-state EEG analysis. Biomed Res. Int. 2019, 3764354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Inoue, M. Cross-Sectional study on Occupational noise and hypertension in the workplace. Arch. Environ. Occup. Health 2005, 60, 106–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Morales-Rodríguez, F.M.; Pérez-Mármol, J.M.; Brown, T. Education burnout and engagement in occupational therapy undergraduate students and its associated factors. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 2889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Demerouti, E.; Mostert, K.; Bakker, A.B. Burnout and work engagement: A thorough investigation of the independency of both constructs. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2010, 15, 209–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Kim, Y.; Lee, E.; Lee, H. Association between workplace bullying and burnout, professional quality of life, and turnover intention among clinical nurses. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Sharma, R.; Sharma, N.P. Opening the gender diversity black box: Causality of perceived gender equity and locus of control and mediation of work engagement in employee well-being. Front. Psychol. 2015, 6, 1371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Salvagioni, D.A.J.; Melanda, F.N.; Mesas, A.E.; González, A.D.; Gabani, F.L.; de Andrade, S.M. Physical, psychological and occupational consequences of job burnout: A systematic review of prospective studies. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0185781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Grover, S.; Sahoo, S.; Bhalla, A.; Avasthi, A. Psychological problems and burnout among medical professionals of a tertiary care hospital of North India: A cross-sectional study. Indian J. Psychiatry 2018, 60, 175–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Alhaffar, B.A.; Abbas, G.; Alhaffar, A.A. The prevalence of burnout syndrome among resident physicians in Syria. J. Occup. Med. Toxicol. 2019, 14, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Padula, R.S.; Chiavegato, L.D.; Cabral, C.M.; Almeid, T.; Ortiz, T.; Carregaro, R.L. Is occupational stress associated with work engagement? Work 2012, 41, 2963–2965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Partelow, S.; Seara, T.; Pollnac, R.B.; Ruiz, V. Job satisfaction in small-scale fisheries: Comparing differences between Costa Rica, Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic. Mar. Policy 2020, 117, 103949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Papastamatelou, J.; Unger, A. Differences in burnout proneness depend on time perspective evidence from an occupational sample of industrial employees and MBA-students. Dialogues Clin. Neurosci. Ment. Health 2018, 1, 52–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Díaz-Morales, J.F. Estructura factorial y fiabilidad del Inventario de Perspectiva Temporal de Zimbardo [Factor structure and reliability of Zimbardo’s Time Perspective Inventory]. Psicothema 2006, 18, 565–571. [Google Scholar]
  32. Maslach, C.; Jackson, S.E.; Leiter, M.P. Maslach Burnout Inventory—Manual, 3rd ed.; Consulting Psychologists Press: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  33. Schaufeli, W.B.; Leiter, M.P.; Maslach, C.; Jackson, S.E. Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey. In The Maslach Burnout Inventory-Test Manual, 3rd ed.; Maslach, C., Jackson, S.E., Leiter, M.P., Eds.; Consulting Psychologists Press: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  34. Van Beek, W.; Berghuis, H.; Kerkhof, A.; Beekman, A. Time perspective, personality and psychopathology. Zimbardo’s Time Perspective Inventory in psychiatry. Time Soc. 2010, 20, 364–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Stolarski, M.; Matthews, P.; Postek, S.; Zimbardo, P.G.; Bitner, J. How feel is a matter of time: Relationships between time perspectives and mood. J. Happiness Stud. 2013, 15, 809–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Toppinen-Tanner, S.; Kalimo, R.; Mutanen, P. The process of burnout in white-collar and blue-collar jobs: Eight-year prospective study of exhaustion. J. Organ. Behav. 2002, 23, 555–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Detaille, S.I.; Heerkens, Y.F.; Engels, J.A.; van der Gulden, J.W.; van Dijk, F.J. Effect evaluation of a self-management program for Dutch workers with a chronic somatic disease: A randomized controlled trial. J. Occup. Rehabil. 2013, 23, 189–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Pedersen, J.; Schultz, B.B.; Madsen, I.E.H.; Solovieva, S.; Andersen, L.L. High physical work demands and working life expectancy in Denmark. Occup. Environ. Med. 2020, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Reid, A.; Daly, A.; LaMontagne, A.D.; Milner, A.; Ronda Pérez, E. Descriptive study of workplace demand, control and bullying among migrant and Australian-born workers by gender: Does workplace support make a difference? BMJ Open 2020, 10, e033652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Dorien-Kooij, T.A.M.; Zacher, H.; Wang, M.; Heckhausen, J. Successful aging at work: A process model to guide future research and practice. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 2020, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Description of the sample.
Table 1. Description of the sample.
VariableDescription
Sex367 men (73.8%) and 130 women (26.2%)
AgeRange: 20–69. Mean: 46.62. Standard Deviation: 10.79
Education levelPrimary education: 76 subjects (15%)
Secondary education: 251 subjects (50.5%)
University studies: 170 subjects (34.3%)
Types of contracts Permanent contract: 75.5%
Temporary contract: 11.7%
Work contract: 11.3%
Seniority in the organizationMean: 19.15. Standard Deviation: 14.26
Work experienceMean: 23.76. Standard Deviation: 12.50
Table 2. Pearson Correlations between the studied variables.
Table 2. Pearson Correlations between the studied variables.
Past NegativePresent HedonisticFuturePast PositivePresent FatalisticEmotional ExhaustionCynicism
Present hedonistic0.271 **
Negative future−0.0280.093
Past positive0.425 **0.365 **0.213 **
Present fatalistic0.480 **0.448 **−0.180 **0.283 **
Emotional exhaustion0.374 **0.205 **−0.100 *0.214 **0.237 **
Cynicism0.318 **0.178 **−0.103 *0.137 **0.190 **0.625 **
Professional efficiency−0.113 *0.0390.408 **0.093 *−0.048−0.105*−0.139 **
Note: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.
Table 3. Personality Predictors of emotional exhaustion.
Table 3. Personality Predictors of emotional exhaustion.
VariablesUnstandardized CoefficientsStandardized CoefficientstSig.
BS.E.B
Constant0.1800.757 0.2380.812
Past negative0.7620.1520.2965.0100.000
Present hedonistic0.1900.1520.0721.2520.211
Negative future−0.3250.165−0.102−1.9730.049
Past positive0.1750.1480.0671.1810.238
Present fatalistic0.0970.1500.0400.6460.519
Note: B: beta coefficient; S.E.: Standard Error; Sign: t: T-test; Sig.: Significativity.
Table 4. Personality Predictors of cynicism.
Table 4. Personality Predictors of cynicism.
VariablesUnstandardized CoefficientsStandardized CoefficientstSig.
BS.E.B
Constant1.2650.676 1.8710.062
Past negative0.6870.1380.3024.9920.000
Present hedonistic0.2300.1350.0991.7000.090
Negative future−0.2860.148−0.102−1.9270.055
Past positive0.0230.1320.0100.1750.861
Present fatalistic−0.1200.133−0.058−0.9050.366
Note: B: beta coefficient; S.E.: Standard Error; Sign: t: T-test; Sig.: Significativity.
Table 5. Personality Predictors of professional efficacy.
Table 5. Personality Predictors of professional efficacy.
Variables Unstandardized CoefficientsStandardized CoefficientstSig.
BS.E.B
Constant1.4320.539 2.6560.008
Past negative−0.3430.110−0.180−3.1220.002
Present hedonistic−0.0200.108−0.010−0.1820.856
Positive future0.9530.1180.4118.0990.000
Past positive0.0280.1060.0150.2640.792
Present fatalistic0.1470.1060.0851.3920.165
Note: B: beta coefficient; S.E.: Standard Error; Sign: t: T-test; Sig.: Significativity.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Detaille, S.; Reig-Botella, A.; Clemente, M.; López-Golpe, J.; De Lange, A. Burnout and Time Perspective of Blue-Collar Workers at the Shipyard. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6905. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186905

AMA Style

Detaille S, Reig-Botella A, Clemente M, López-Golpe J, De Lange A. Burnout and Time Perspective of Blue-Collar Workers at the Shipyard. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(18):6905. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186905

Chicago/Turabian Style

Detaille, Sarah, Adela Reig-Botella, Miguel Clemente, Jaime López-Golpe, and Annet De Lange. 2020. "Burnout and Time Perspective of Blue-Collar Workers at the Shipyard" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 18: 6905. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186905

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop