This article was downloaded by: [University of Tennessee, Knoxville]

On: 25 December 2014, At: 10:14

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Anxiety, Stress, & Coping: An

International Journal
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gasc20

Daily fluctuations in teachers' well-

being: a diary study using the Job
Demands–Resources model
a
Silvia Simbula
a
Department of Science Education , University of Bologna , Via
Filippo Re 6, 40126, Bologna, Italy
Published online: 30 Mar 2010.

To cite this article: Silvia Simbula (2010) Daily fluctuations in teachers' well-being: a diary study
using the Job Demands–Resources model, Anxiety, Stress, & Coping: An International Journal, 23:5,
563-584, DOI: 10.1080/10615801003728273

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10615801003728273

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 Anxiety, Stress, & Coping
Vol. 23, No. 5, October 2010, 563
584

Daily fluctuations in teachers’ well-being: a diary study using the Job

Demands Resources model
Silvia Simbula*

Department of Science Education, University of Bologna, Via Filippo Re 6, 40126 Bologna, Italy
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

(Received 12 May 2009; final version received 24 February 2010)

The study tests the dynamic nature of the Job Demands
Resources model with
regard to both motivational and health impairment processes. It does so by
examining whether daily fluctuations in co-workers’ support (i.e., a typical job
resource) and daily fluctuations in work/family conflict (i.e., a typical job
demand) predict day-levels of job satisfaction and mental health through work
engagement and exhaustion, respectively. A total of 61 schoolteachers completed
a general questionnaire and a daily survey over a period of five consecutive work
days. Multilevel analyses provided evidence for both the above processes.
Consistently with the hypotheses, our results showed that day-level work
engagement mediated the impact of day-level co-workers’ support on day-level
job satisfaction and day-level mental health, after general levels of work
engagement and outcome variables had been controlled for. Moreover, day-level
exhaustion mediated the relationship between day-level work/family conflict and
day-level job satisfaction and day-level mental health after general levels of
exhaustion and outcome variables had been controlled for. These findings provide
new insights into the dynamic psychological processes that determine daily
fluctuations in employee well-being. Such insights may be transformed into job
redesign strategies and other interventions designed to enhance work-related
psychological well-being on a daily level.
Keywords: diary study; exhaustion; Job Demands
Resources model; teachers;
work engagement

Introduction
Daily-based variation in occupational well-being and its linkage with daily-based
antecedents has often been emphasized (Wright, Cropanzano, & Meyer, 2004).
However, most researchers have focused primarily on stable traits, including how
individuals differ from each other (i.e., between-person variations). Consequently,
they have neglected potential within-person variations over time that are highlighted
by the state perspective (Yeo & Neal, 2004).
This distinction is important from both a theoretical and a practical perspective.
In fact, many researchers have called for additional research on the relative
contributions of state and trait measures on organizational outcomes (e.g.,
Sonnentag, 2005; Wright et al., 2004). The present study on Italian schoolteachers
responds to this call by integrating both approaches. Based on the Job Demands

Resources (JD
R) model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007), the purpose of this study is to

*Email: silvia.simbula@unibo.it
ISSN 1061-5806 print/1477-2205 online
# 2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/10615801003728273
http://www.informaworld.com
 564 S. Simbula

investigate the relative influence of state job demands and job resources, such as
work/family conflict and co-workers’ support, on outcome variables, such as mental
health and job satisfaction, mediated by exhaustion and work engagement,
respectively.

Diary study
Several researchers (e.g., Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004) have found a link among trait
antecedents (i.e., general support from colleagues and supervisor, general perfor-
mance feedback, and general autonomy) and general outcomes (i.e., burnout, work
engagement, ill health, and commitment). However, it is likely that occupational
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

well-being is affected by at least two aspects: the stable characteristics of work and
workers (traits or general tendencies) and the specific and less stable states of work
and workers that can fluctuate over time (Wright et al., 2004).
According to Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Demerouti, and Schaufeli (2009), with the
expression traits or general tendencies, we refer to individual dispositions or general
psychological well-being. In contrast, state correlates reflect how individuals
feel about themselves and the environment at certain points in time. That is, general
tendencies are relatively stable, whereas states may change over time. This distinction
has given rise to two different perspectives in the literature. Some scholars argue that
transitory states may be more important than stable traits for understanding
organizational outcomes, such as absenteeism, pro-social behavior, and job satisfac-
tion (e.g., Brief, 1998; George, 1991). These authors support the study of states in
relation to work outcomes because they are changeable and measurable and have
significant practical implications for managers. Alternatively, Staw and his colleagues
(e.g., Staw & Ross, 1985) argue for a more dispositional or trait approach. Finally,
some authors maintain that an integrated approach is needed to understand
organizational behavior (Wright et al., 2004).
Testing between-person fluctuations is important because it highlights how
employees differ in their general reactions to work, well-being, and performance.
However, it is also important to take into account that working conditions may vary
from day to day (Butler, Grzywacz, Bass, & Linney, 2005). This enables researchers
to understand why employees who are engaged in their jobs have ‘‘off-days,’’ or why
employees who are exhausted feel satisfied on certain days. For example, a teacher
might be confronted with several demands, including pupils’ misbehavior, teaching
obligations, and meetings with the school principal, on a stressful day. As a result,
the teacher might exhibit higher levels of exhaustion and poorer mental health. In
contrast, in a workday during which the teacher has access to more job resources
(e.g., the opportunity to receive support from colleagues and develop professionally),
he or she might feel more engaged and satisfied. Perspectives that take within-person
differences into account provide such information because they focus on momentary
well-being as well as the fluctuations in job demands and job resources, which may
thus differ from day to day.
The fundamental benefit of research designs that investigate both states and
traits is that they permit researchers to examine reported events and experiences as
they occur or close to their occurrence within the context of a person’s everyday life.
In addition, they provide information complementary to that obtainable using more
traditional designs (Tennen & Affleck, 2002). Consequently, they make it possible to
 Anxiety, Stress, & Coping 565

overcome the biases introduced by retrospection over relatively long periods of time
(i.e., weeks or months; Tourangeau, Rips, & Rasinski, 2000). Although researchers
have paid close attention to between-person variations in the work context, they have
recently begun to investigate momentary episodes of work engagement (Sonnentag,
2003), job satisfaction (Ilies & Judge, 2002), exhaustion (Sonnenschein, Sorbi, van
Doornen, Schaufeli, & Maas, 2007), physical symptoms, including episodes of minor
illness (e.g., Stone, Reed, & Neale, 1987), and dynamic mechanisms that are
underpinned in the JD
R model (Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Heuven, Demerouti, &
Schaufeli, 2008; Xanthopoulou et al., 2009). These studies conclude that it is
important to consider intra-individual fluctuations in processes linking antecedents
to well-being at work.
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

The Job Demands
Resources (JD
R) model

The JD
R Model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, &
Schaufeli, 2001) is a heuristic and parsimonious model that specifies how health
impairment (e.g., burnout) and motivation (e.g., work engagement) may be produced
as a consequence of work conditions. This model assumes that although every
occupation has its own specific work characteristics, these characteristics can be
classified into two general categories: job demands and job resources. Job demands
are the physical, psychological, social, or organizational aspects of the job that
require physical and/or psychological effort; therefore, they are related to physiolo-
gical and/or psychological costs (Demerouti et al., 2001). Job resources are the
physical, psychological, social, or organizational aspects of the job that are
functional to achieving work goals, reduce job demands and the related physiological
and psychological costs, and stimulate personal growth and development (Bakker &
Demerouti, 2007). The basic premise of the JD
R model (Demerouti et al., 2001) is
that these two categories of work characteristics evoke two relatively independent
psychological processes that determine employee well-being: a health impairment
process and a motivational process.
In the health impairment process, high job demands exhaust employees’ mental
and physical resources, which can lead to energy depletion (Demerouti et al., 2001).
For example, researchers (e.g., Lewig & Dollard, 2003) have repeatedly found that
specific job demands (e.g., workload, emotional demands, or emotional dissonance)
predict exhaustion among various occupational groups. Emotional exhaustion (i.e.,
the depletion or the draining of mental energy caused by interpersonal demands) is
considered as the core dimension of burnout (Maslach, Leiter, & Schaufeli, 2008).
Particularly, emotional exhaustion is considered to be the stress component of the
syndrome because it consists of ‘‘feelings of being overextended and depleted of one’s
emotional and physical resources’’ (Halbesleben & Demerouti, 2005, p. 208). Given
that exhaustion has been recognized as a major indicator of negative strain (Karasek,
1979), the present study’s exclusive focus on this particular outcome is warranted.
The health impairment process is illuminated by Hockey’s (1997) compensatory
regulatory-control model, which holds that employees under stress face a trade-off
between the protection of their performance goals and the mental effort that they
must invest to achieve those goals. When job demands increase, regulatory problems
occur because people must mobilize compensatory effort to deal with the increased
demands while maintaining performance levels. This extra compensatory effort is
 566 S. Simbula

associated with physiological and psychological costs (i.e., fatigue and irritability).
Continuous mobilization of compensatory effort drains the employee’s energy and
may therefore lead to exhaustion and poor health (Hockey, 1997). Moreover, several
researchers have shown that exhaustion is also related to negative effects in terms of
mental health, such as anxiety and depression (Maslach et al., 2008).
The second process involved in the JD
R model is a motivational process in
which job resources, owing to their motivational potential, influence employees to
achieve their work goals, which can lead to work engagement (Bakker & Demerouti,
2007). Work engagement is defined as a persistent, pervasive, and positive affective-
motivational state of fulfillment in employees (Schaufeli, Salanova, González-Romá,
& Bakker, 2002), which consists of three dimensions: vigor; dedication; and
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

absorption. Moreover, although past researchers have conceptualized work engage-

ment as a relatively stable individual difference variable, there is some indication that
work engagement fluctuates within individuals over time (Kahn, 1990; Sonnentag,
2003). The motivational process is driven by the availability of job resources, which
play a motivational role because they foster employees’ growth, learning, and
development. However, these resources might also be instrumental in employees’
achieving work goals. According to Deci and Ryan (2000), in the former case, job
resources fulfill basic human needs, such as the needs for autonomy, relatedness, and
competence. In the latter case, the motivational role of job resources may be
explained by the effort-recovery approach (Meijman & Mulder, 1998). This approach
assumes that work environments that offer numerous resources foster the willingness
of employees to dedicate their efforts and abilities to work tasks. In such
environments, it is likely that employees will complete tasks and attain their work
goals. Therefore, job resources are likely to foster work engagement through a
motivational process that satisfies basic needs for autonomy, relatedness, and
competence and increases the likelihood of attaining one’s work goals.
In addition, we propose that engaged employees will report greater job
satisfaction and better mental health. Work engagement is a positive experience in
itself. Individuals who generally enjoy a high level of engagement at work should
have more positive experiences (Sonnentag, Mojza, Binnewies, & Scholl, 2008).
Positive experiences and pleasant events are known to promote job satisfaction
(Weiss, Nicholas, & Daus, 1999). Highly engaged employees are more likely to
successfully perform at work (Bakker, 2009). In addition, successful performance is
known to foster job satisfaction (Judge, Thoresen, Bono, & Patton, 2001). Results of
studies focusing on between-person differences suggest that work engagement is
negatively related to physical symptoms and other indicators of poor well-being. For
example, in their longitudinal study, Britt, Castro, and Adler (2005) found that
engagement predicted higher well-being and fewer physical symptoms, also when
controlling for initial levels of well-being and symptoms. Other researchers have
shown that engaged employees seem to enjoy better mental and psychosomatic
health (see Schaufeli & Salanova, 2008).
Currently, the main assumptions of the JD
R model have been supported by the
findings of cross-sectional and longitudinal studies (see Bakker & Demerouti, 2007).
More recently, the dynamic nature of the JD
R model has also been tested using a
diary approach and a multilevel design. For example, Xanthopoulou et al. (2008)
investigated whether daily social support fostered day-levels of job performance
through self-efficacy beliefs and work engagement among 44 flight attendants. The
 Anxiety, Stress, & Coping 567

results of multi-level analyses showed that self-efficacy did not mediate the
relationship between support and engagement, whereas work engagement mediated
the relationship between self-efficacy and performance. Further, they found that
support had an indirect effect on in-role performance through work engagement.
In another more recent study, by adding the role of personal resources in the
motivational process of the JD
R model, Xanthopoulou et al. (2009) showed that
day-level job resources exert an effect on work engagement through day-level
personal resources, after controlling for general levels of personal resources and
engagement. Taken together, these findings provide support for the dynamic
character of the motivational process of the JD
R model (Xanthopoulou et al.,
2009). However, these studies have focused only on the motivational process of the
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

JD
R model. Therefore, the purpose of the present study is to increase knowledge
about the dynamic nature of the JD
R model by considering between- and within-
person variations with regard to both motivational and health impairment processes.

The study context

The sample of the current study is comprised of schoolteachers. There were several
reasons for choosing teachers as the study group. First, teaching has been identified
as a particularly stressful occupation (e.g., Montgomery & Rupp, 2005). Second, the
results of many studies have shown that teachers are also satisfied with and
enthusiastic about their work (Roth, Assor, Kanat-Maymon, & Kaplan, 2007). In
addition, researchers have found that teachers are engaged in their jobs (Hakanen,
Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2006). This was a beneficial precondition for testing both the
health impairment and the motivational processes. We also chose to examine work/
family conflict as a job demand and co-workers’ support as a job resource to
investigate the antecedents of exhaustion and work engagement. Work/family
conflict refers to the individual’s perception that joint role pressures from the
work and family domains are incompatible in some respect, resulting in his or her
participation in one role becoming more difficult due to participation in another role
(Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). The results of numerous studies have shown that
experiencing conflict between the work and family domains can have serious negative
consequences on individuals’ well-being, such as burnout and depression (Allen,
Herst, Bruck, & Sutton, 2000). Researchers have shown that many teachers are
unable to effectively manage their professional and family roles (Spencer, 1986). In
addition, teachers must do some of their work, such as preparing lessons for the next
day and grading exams, at home. Therefore, they have to devote time to their work
outside of school hours, which results in their sometimes sacrificing time that could
be devoted to housework and their children.
Further, many researchers have found that support from co-workers may be
particularly important when examining the social support/work engagement
relationship (e.g., Xanthopoulou et al., 2009). More than ever, social support seems
important for Italian teachers because it can promote coping in the face of changes
associated with recent reforms of the school system (e.g., new tasks concerning the
local management of schools and appraisal of teaching performance). In this way,
social support might be a crucial predictor of teachers’ state levels of engagement
and well-being.
 568 S. Simbula

Purpose of the current study

Based on our theoretical analysis, the main objectives of this study are to (a) take a
relatively new approach to researching exhaustion and work engagement and (b) test
the validity of the assumptions of the JD
R model using a daily diary methodology.
Specifically, the following hypotheses guide the study:
H1: Day-level work engagement mediates the relationship between day-level co-workers’
support and day-level job satisfaction (H1a) and day-level mental health (H1b), after
general levels of work engagement, job satisfaction, and mental health have been
controlled for.
H2: Day-level exhaustion mediates the relationship between day-level work/family
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

conflict and day-level job satisfaction (H2a) and day-level mental health (H2b), after
general levels of exhaustion, job satisfaction, and mental health have been controlled
for.

Method
Participants
The total sample was comprised of 61 Italian public schoolteachers. Fifty-four
(88.5%) were women, and seven (11.5%) were men, and 56% were married. Of the
teachers, 23% were under the age of 36 years, 39% were between the ages of 36 and
50 years, and 38% were over the age of 50 years. Most participants reported several
years of service, as 47% had over 20 years of teaching experience. On average,
participants worked 30.2 hours per week (SD 8.8). The teachers worked in three
types of school: 33% in elementary schools; 27% in lower-secondary; and 40% in
upper-secondary schools.

Procedure
We began the recruitment process by contacting the principals of the schools. After
the schools principals had expressed their willingness to participate, 425 Italian
teachers received a general paper-and-pencil questionnaire and a return envelope at
their school. The questionnaire was accompanied by a letter that was signed by the
coordinator of the university research unit, which explained the general aim of the
study and stressed that the answers would be anonymous. Ultimately, 236 Italian
teachers participated (response rate of 55.5%). The teachers were asked to complete
the questionnaire within 10 days of its delivery and to place it in a special box at their
school to guarantee complete privacy.
These 236 teachers were then asked to take part in a diary survey. Eighty-nine
teachers agreed to participate (response rate of 37.7%). They subsequently received
a package including a diary booklet, instructions on how to complete the diary, and
a return envelope. The teachers were then instructed to fill in the diary for five
consecutive work-days at the end of each day. The teachers were also asked to fill in
a personal code on the questionnaire and the diary booklet. As a result, their
anonymity was assured, and the university researchers were able to match the
questionnaires and the diaries to each participant.
A total of 61 diaries were returned (response rate of 25.8%). Preliminary analyses
revealed that this final sample did not differ significantly from the remaining
 Anxiety, Stress, & Coping 569

participants who only completed the initial questionnaire (N 175) with regard to
biographical characteristics, such as gender (x2 [1, N 234] .89, ns), age (x2 [4, N 
233] 2.08, ns), job tenure (x2 [4, N 221] 4.04, ns), marital status (x2 [4, N 
201] 8.54, ns), and type of school (x2 [2, N 232] 4.63, ns). The two samples did
not differ significantly with regard to outcome variables, such as general exhaustion
(F [1, 234] 1.05, ns), general work engagement (F [1, 234] 3.25, ns), general mental
health (F [1, 234] .07, ns), and general job satisfaction (F [1, 234] .01, ns).

Measures
Questionnaire data
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

General emotional exhaustion was measured with a subscale of the Maslach

Burnout Inventory (MBI)-Educator Survey (Maslach, Jackson, & Schwab, 1996;
Italian version: Sirigatti & Stefanile, 1993). The exhaustion scale included nine items
referring to severe fatigue (a .91). A sample item is: ‘‘I feel emotionally drained by
my work.’’ Items were scored on a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0
(never) to 6 (always).
General work engagement was assessed with the Italian version of the nine-item
Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES; Schaufeli, Bakker, & Salanova, 2006;
Italian version: Simbula, Guglielmi, Schaufeli, & Depolo, in press). The items were
grouped into three subscales reflecting the three underlying dimensions of work
engagement: vigor was measured with three items (e.g., ‘‘At my work, I feel strong
and vigorous’’), dedication was measured with three items (e.g., ‘‘I’m enthusiastic
about my job’’), and absorption was measured with three items (e.g., ‘‘When I am
working, I forget everything else around me’’). We followed Schaufeli et al.’s (2006)
recommendation and computed an overall engagement score of the UWES (a .91),
which we used in the analyses. All items were scored on a seven-point Likert-type
scale ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (always).
General mental health was assessed with the General Health Questionnaire-12
(Goldberg, 1992; Italian version: Fraccaroli & Schadee, 1993). This scale assesses
whether participants have recently experienced a particular symptom or behavior.
However, we instructed participants to report how they felt ‘‘in general.’’ An
example item is: ‘‘Generally, do you feel constantly under strain?’’ Each item was
rated on a four-point scale ranging from 0 (never) to 3 (always), where higher scores
indicated poorer perceived health. (a .82).
General job satisfaction was assessed with a single item (Wanous, Reichers, &
Hudy, 1997). The statement was ‘‘Overall, how satisfied are you with your job?’’ The
item was scored on a five-point scale ranging from 1 (totally unsatisfied) to 5 (totally
satisfied). Despite of the use of a single item, Wanous et al. (1997) found that the
one-item and the multi-item scale measures of overall job satisfaction are equally
robust.

Diary data
The daily survey assessed participants’ day-level measures of work/family conflict,
co-workers’ support, emotional exhaustion, work engagement, mental health and job
satisfaction on a specific day. All day-level measures were rated on a seven-point
 570 S. Simbula

scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree). Given that diary studies
need to limit the number of items from the original scale, the selection of items was
based on their face validity.
Day-level work/family conflict was measured with two items (e.g., Today,
anxieties about work have interfered with my ability to satisfy the needs of my
family) that were adapted from a general work
family scale (Guglielmi, Paplomatas,
Simbula, & Depolo, in press). Cronbach’s alphas across the five days ranged from .82
and .93 (M .88), and inter-item correlations ranged from .69 to .88.
Day-level co-workers’ support was measured with one item: ‘‘Today, the people I
work with collaborated in getting the job done.’’ This item was adapted from the
colleague support scale of the Job Content Instrument (Karasek, 1985; Italian
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

version: Cenni & Barbieri, 1997). Unpublished analyses (Simbula, 2009) on a cross-
sectional data-set (N 236), showed that this particular item correlated .48 (pB.001)
with the total score of the scale without this item. Additional analyses showed that
the factor loading of this single item was .72.
Day-level emotional exhaustion was assessed with three adapted items (e.g.,
‘‘Today, I felt emotionally drained by my work’’) of the emotional exhaustion
subscale of the MBI-Educator Survey (Maslach et al., 1996; Sirigatti & Stefanile,
1993). Cronbach’s alphas ranged from .69 to .79 (M .75).
Day-level work engagement was measured with five adapted items from the
UWES (Schaufeli et al., 2006; Simbula et al., 2008). We included two items for vigor
(e.g., ‘‘Today, I was bursting with energy while working’’), one item for dedication
(e.g., ‘‘Today, my job inspired me’’), and two items for absorption (e.g., ‘‘Today, I was
completely immersed in my work’’). We computed an overall work engagement score
for each of the 5 days. Cronbach’s alphas across the five days ranged from .68 to .80
(M .74).
Day-level mental health was assessed with four adapted items (e.g., ‘‘Today, I felt
I couldn’t overcome my difficulties’’) of the General Health Questionnaire-12
(Goldberg, 1992; Fraccaroli & Schadee, 1993). Cronbach’s alphas across occasions
ranged from .72 to .82 (M .77).
Day-level job satisfaction was assessed with a single item (Wanous et al., 1997).
The statement was: ‘‘Overall, how satisfied were you today with your job?’’

Analytic strategy
Each participant provided data at two levels: the person level (e.g., general work
engagement and demographic and biographical variables) and day level (e.g., day-
level work engagement and co-workers’ support), with the day-level data being
nested within the person-level data. Multilevel analysis with the MLwiN program
(Rashbash, Browne, Healy, Cameron, & Charlton, 2000) was used to analyze the
data. In these analyses, predictor variables at the person level (general or trait) were
level-2 data, whereas predictor variables at the day level were level-1 data. First-level
predictor variables were centered on the respective person mean, whereas second-
level variables were centered on the grand mean. We centered variables at Level 1
around the respective person mean because we wanted to eliminate between-person
variance in order to attribute the effects of Level 1 variables to within-person effects
and to rule out interpretations based on between-person differences (Hofmann &
Gavin, 1998).
 Anxiety, Stress, & Coping 571

When investigating the effects of predictors on specific outcomes, additional

factors may impact on these variables. Demographic factors, in particular, may have an
effect on exhaustion and mental health, as well as on work engagement and job
satisfaction (e.g., Maslach et al., 2008; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2008). However, none of
the demographic characteristics were significant predictors of any dependent
variables. Consequently, they were excluded from further analyses. However, the
type of school in which the teachers were employed (i.e., two dummy variables in which
the category ‘‘upper-secondary school’’ was the point of reference when constructing
the dummies), was significantly related to day-level work engagement (elementary
school: t(52) 2.25, pB.05; lower-secondary school: t(52) 2.37, pB.05), day-level job
satisfaction (elementary school: t(52) 3.48, p B.001; lower-secondary school: t(52) 
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

2.12, p B.05), and day-level mental health (elementary school: t(52) 3.19, p B.01;
lower-secondary school: t(52) .98, ns). Therefore, we controlled for type of school.
Moreover, an individual’s work engagement or exhaustion on a specific day may
not be solely the result of that individual’s day-level predictors (e.g., co-workers’
support or work/family conflict) on that day. Also, the individual’s general tendency
to exhibit work engagement or exhaustion may affect work engagement or
exhaustion on that day (e.g., Sonnentag, 2003). The same applies to job satisfaction
and mental health. That is, feeling satisfied on a specific day may be substantially
influenced by the individual’s general tendency to be satisfied. We consequently
controlled for these trait aspects in the analyses.

Results
Descriptives
The means, standard deviations, and correlations for all study variables are presented
in Table 1. All significant relationships between the variables were in the expected
direction.

Fluctuation over time

Before testing the hypotheses, we examined the proportion of variance attributed to the
two levels of analysis. To this end, we calculated the intra-class correlation coefficient
(r) for each day-level variable. The results showed that 69% of the variance in work/
family conflict and 58% of the variance in co-workers’ support were attributable to
between-person variations. Further, 62% of the variance in work engagement and 61%
of the variance in exhaustion were attributable to between-person variations. Finally,
46% of the variance in day-level mental health and 49% of the variance in day-level job
satisfaction were attributable to between-person variations. Therefore, significant
amounts of variance were left unexplained by within-person variation, which high-
lights the importance of using a multi-level approach.

Tests of the hypotheses

Work engagement as a mediator
Hypothesis H1 stated that day-level co-workers support has a positive effect on day-
level job satisfaction (H1a) and a negative effect on day-level mental health (H1b)
 572
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and correlations among variables.

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. General exhaustion 1.89 1.26

2. General work engagement 4.36 .93
.53**

3. General mental health .89 .37 .40**
.42**

S. Simbula
4. General job satisfaction 3.78 .84
.68** .56**
.32*

5. Day-level exhaustion 3.12 1.26 .66**
.24 .17
.33*

6. Day-level work engagement 4.93 .87
.36* .65**
.23 .36*
.28

7. Day-level mental health 2.49 .87 .46**
.38** .28
.57** .65**
.49**

8. Day-level job satisfaction 5.29 .98
.41** .44**
.29* .56**
.37** .67**
.65**

9. Day-level W
F conflict 3.20 1.62 .43**
.09 .14
.23 .74** .01 .54**
.23

10. Day-level co-workers’ support 5.31 1.35
.19 .07 .07 .22
.34* .20
.53** .35**
.32*

Note: First-level data was average across five days, W
Fwork
family.
*pB.05; **pB.01.
 Anxiety, Stress, & Coping 573

through the mediation of day-level work engagement. This hypothesis was tested
using Baron and Kenny’s (1986) procedure, which specifies that three conditions
need to be fulfilled to establish mediation. First, the predictor should be related to
the mediator. Second, the mediator should be related to the outcome. Third, the
previously significant relationship between the predictor and the outcome should
become non-significant (full mediation) or significantly weaker (partial mediation)
after inclusion of the mediator. Moreover, in order to examine the significance of the
mediating effects, the Sobel test was used.
The results of multilevel analyses supported all prerequisite conditions for testing
mediation. In fact, day-level colleague support was significantly related to both day-
level work engagement (t(300) 5.29, p B.001), day-level job satisfaction (t(300) 3.93,
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

p B.001), and day-level mental health (t(300) 5.04, p B.001). The second
condition was also fulfilled, as day-level work engagement was significantly related
to day-level job satisfaction (t(300) 7.03, p B.001) and day-level mental health
(t(300) 9.96, p B.001).
To test hypothesis H1a, we examined the four nested models presented in Table 2.
In the Null Model the intercept was the only predictor. In Model 1, we entered the
type of school (Level 2) and the trait components of job satisfaction and work
engagement (Level 2) as predictors. In Model 2, we entered day-level co-workers’
support. Finally, in Model 3, we entered day-level work engagement. To test the
improvement of each model with respect to the previous one, we computed the
difference between the respective likelihood ratios. This difference follows a chi-
square distribution, with df equaling the number of new parameters added to the
model (Hox, 2002).
Table 2 shows that the inclusion of day-level work engagement in Model 3
significantly decreased the magnitude of the relationship between co-workers’
support and job satisfaction. Moreover, the results of the Sobel test indicated that
this partial mediating effect was significant (z4.09, pB.001). Further, compared to
previous models, Model 3 showed the best fit, given that its value of deviance was
significantly lower (^ 2*log 40.72, df1, pB.001). Therefore, work engagement
partially mediated the relationship between co-workers’ support and job satisfaction.
The same procedure was followed for day-level mental health as the dependent
variable. Table 3 displays the results. After day-level work engagement was entered
into the model, day-level co-workers’ support showed a significantly lower impact on
mental health (z 4.49, pB.001). Again, Model 3 showed a significant improvement
over the previous model (^ 2*log 68.20, df 1, p B.001). That is, work
engagement also partially mediated the relationship between co-workers’ support
and mental health. Taken together, the above results provide some support for
hypotheses H1a and H1b.

Emotional exhaustion as a mediator

Hypothesis H2 stated that the effect of work/family conflict on job satisfaction (H2a)
and mental health (H2b) is mediated by emotional exhaustion. Again, we first tested
the impact of the predictor (work/family conflict) variable on the mediator
(exhaustion) and the outcome (job satisfaction and mental health) variables. As
expected, work/family conflict was positively related to exhaustion (t(300) 7.96, p B
.001) and mental health (t(300) 6.22, p B.001). In addition, it was negatively related
 574
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

Table 2. Multilevel estimates for models predicting day-level job satisfaction: day-level work engagement as mediator.

Model Null 1 2 3

Variables Estimate SE t Estimate SE t Estimate SE t Estimate SE t

Intercept 5.31 .13 40.85 4.99 .18 27.72 4.99 .18 27.72 4.99 .18 27.72
Type school (Elementary) .62 .26 2.38* .62 .26 2.38* .64 .26 2.46*
Type school (Lower- .48 .29 1.66 .48 .29 1.66 .49 .29 1.69
secondary)
General job satisfaction .38 .16 2.38* .38 .16 2.38* .38 .16 2.38*

S. Simbula
General work engagement .16 .14 1.14 .16 .14 1.14 .17 .14 1.21
Day-level co-workers’ support .23 .06 3.83*** .13 .06 2.17*
Day-level work engagement .58 .09 6.44***

2*log 899.71 750.94 736.56 695.84
^
2*log 148.77*** 14.38*** 40.72***
df 4 1 1
Level 1 (within-person) .86 .08 .78 .08 .73 .07 .61 .06
variance
Level 2 (between-person) .82 .18 .46 .12 .47 .12 .50 .12
variance
Note: Null Model the intercept is the only predictor, Model 1Null Modelcontrol variables, Model 2M1day-level predictor, Model 3 M2mediator.
*p B.05; p***B.001.
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

Table 3. Multilevel estimates for models predicting day-level mental health: day-level work engagement as mediator.

Model Null 1 2 3

Variables Estimate SE t Estimate SE t Estimate SE t Estimate SE t

Intercept 2.50 .11 22.73 2.81 .17 16.53 2.81 .17 16.53 2.80 .17 16.47
Type school (Elementary)
.71 .26
2.73**
.71 .26
2.73**
.70 .26
2.69**
Type school (Lower-
.10 .27
.37
.10 .27
.37
.09 .27
.33
secondary)

Anxiety, Stress, & Coping

General mental health .05 .32 .16 .05 .32 .16 .07 .31 .23
General work engagement
.28 .13
2.15*
.28 .13
2.15*
.28 .13
2.15*
Day-level co-workers’
.28 .06
4.67***
.13 .05
2.60**
support
Day-level work engagement
.68 .08
8.50***

2*log 831.75 741.43 718.57 650.37
^
2*log 90.32*** 22.86*** 68.20***
df 4 1 1
Level 1 (within-person) .73 .07 .79 .08 .71 .07 .52 .05
variance
Level 2 (between-person) .63 .14 .43 .12 .45 .12 .49 .12
variance
Note: Null Modelthe intercept is the only predictor, Model 1Null Modelcontrol variables, Model 2M1day-level predictor, Model 3M2mediator.
*p B.05; **pB.01; ***p B.001.

575
 576
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

Table 4. Multilevel estimates for models predicting day-level job satisfaction: day-level emotional exhaustion as mediator.

Model Null 1 2 3

Variables Estimate SE t Estimate SE t Estimate SE t Estimate SE t

Intercept 5.31 .13 40.85 5.01 .18 27.83 5.01 .18 27.83 5.02 .18 27.89
Type school (Elementary) .65 .27 2.41* .65 .27 2.41* .64 .27 2.37*
Type school (Lower- .41 .28 1.46 .41 .29 1.41 .40 .29 1.38
secondary)
General job satisfaction .39 .20 1.95* .39 .20 1.95 .37 .20 1.85
General exhaustion
.07 .12
.58
.08 .12
.67
.08 .13
.62

S. Simbula
Day-level W
F conflict
.25 .05
5.00**
.06 .06
1.00
Day-level exhaustion
.44 .07
6.29**

2*log 899.71 737.78 714.06 665.94
^
2*log 161.93** 23.72** 48.12**
df 4 1 1
Level 1 .86 .08 .78 .08 .71 .07 .59 .06
(within-person)
variance
Level 2 .82 .18 .49 .13 .52 .13 .56 .13
(between-person)
variance
Note: W
Fwork
family, Null Model the intercept is the only predictor, Model 1Null Modelcontrol variables, Model 2M1day-level predictor, Model 3 M2
mediator.
*pB.05; **pB.001.
 Anxiety, Stress, & Coping 577

to satisfaction (t(300) 4.56, p B.001). The second condition was also fulfilled,
given that day-level exhaustion was significantly related to job satisfaction (t(300) 
8.35, p B.001) and mental health (t(300) 10.28, p B.001). To test the third
condition, day-level emotional exhaustion was added to the control variables and the
day-level predictor (work/family conflict) in the multilevel model. Table 4 shows that,
after day-level exhaustion was entered as an additional predictor variable (Model 3),
the model fit improved (^2*log48.12, df 1, p B.001). Further, the relation-
ship between work/family conflict and job satisfaction became non-significant (z 
4.94, p B.001), supporting hypothesis H2a.
Finally, the same procedure was adopted for day-level mental health as the
dependent variable (H2b). Table 5 shows that the inclusion of day-level exhaustion in
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

Model 3 made the previously significant relationship between work/family conflict

and mental health non-significant (z 5.64, p B.001). Again, Model 3 was the model
that best fitted the data, as its value was significantly lower (^ 2*log 65.13, df1,
p B.001) compared to the previous models. Therefore, exhaustion fully mediated the
work/family conflict/mental health relationship, providing support for hypothesis
H2b.

Discussion
The aim of this study was to test between- and within-person variations with regard
to both the motivational and the health impairment processes of the JD
R model.
Researchers have stressed the importance of learning more about how individuals
deal with their health and health status deviations in everyday situations (Sonnentag,
2005). To date, researchers studying stress in the workplace have primarily focused
on between-person relationships, sometimes neglecting within-person processes
(Conway & Briner, 2002). The same applies to the JD
R model, with the exception
of two studies (Xanthopoulou et al., 2008, 2009), that focused only on the so-called
motivational process.
Our findings confirm the dynamic character of both motivational and energetic
processes. As far as the motivational process is concerned, our findings are consistent
with those of earlier research on the beneficial effects of social support on individual
well-being and job satisfaction (Matthiesen, Aasen, Holst, Wie, & Einarsen, 2003).
Indeed, the literature contains numerous studies in which co-workers’ support is
reported as being one of the most important factors in teacher development and
school improvement (Kelchtermans & Strittmatter, 1999). Relations with colleagues
are of particular importance, given the evidence for the crossover of exhaustion and
work engagement. Crossover or emotional contagion can be defined as the transfer
of negative (or positive) experiences from one person to another (Westman, 2001).
That is, colleagues may influence each other with their exhaustion as well as their
work engagement. Although researchers suggest that negative emotions are more
easily transferred than positive emotions, it is likely that work engagement may
crossover as well. In this regard, Bakker, Van Emmerik, and Euwema (2006) found
that people who worked in highly engaged teams reported higher levels of vigor,
dedication, and absorption that were independent of the work conditions. Similarly,
Schaufeli et al. (2001) interviewed 30 employees, and found that engaged workers
were generally optimistic, took personal initiative, and were inclined to help their
colleagues if needed. This created a positive spiral of success that was communicated
 578
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

Table 5. Multilevel estimates for models predicting day-level mental health: day-level emotional exhaustion as mediator.

Model Null 1 2 3

Variables Estimate SE t Estimate SE t Estimate SE t Estimate SE t

Intercept 2.50 .11 22.73 2.78 .17 16.35 2.77 .17 16.29 2.75 .17 16.18
Type school (Elementary)
.67 .26
2.58**
.67 .26
2.58**
.64 .26
2.46*
Type school (Lower-
.13 .26
.50
.13 .26
.50
.11 .26
.42
secondary)
General mental health
.02 .32
.06
.03 .32
.09
.03 .31
.10
General exhaustion .26 .09 2.89** .26 .09 2.89** .25 .09 2.78**
Day-level W
F conflict .31 .05 6.20*** .09 .05 1.80

S. Simbula
Day-level exhaustion .48 .06 8.00***

2*log 831.75 728.25 694.21 629.08
^
2*log 103.50*** 34.04*** 65.13***
df 4 1 1
Level 1 (within-person) .73 .07 .81 .08 .69 .07 .51 .05
variance
Level 2 (between- .63 .14 .42 .12 .45 .12 .48 .12
person) variance
Note: W
F work
family, Null Model the intercept is the only predictor, Model 1Null Modelcontrol variables, Model 2 M1day-level predictor, Model 3
M2mediator.
*pB.05; **pB.01; ***pB.001.
 Anxiety, Stress, & Coping 579

to others in the work environment. Consequently, the positive mood contagion

resulted in more cooperative behavior and better task performance. In the case of
teachers, it is possible that their work engagement improves their students’
performance. In fact, it is common knowledge that teachers play a key role in
students’ success. For example, Patrick, Hisley, and Kempler (2000) found that
teachers who were perceived as having a dynamic, enthusiastic style tended to have
students who were more highly intrinsically motivated regarding the subject matter
and more energized in class. Similarly, Bakker (2005) reported a positive relationship
between music teachers’ flow (e.g., absorption, work enjoyment, and intrinsic work
motivation) and the experience of flow among their students.
Our results also confirm findings on within-person effects reported in earlier day-
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

level studies (Xanthopoulou et al., 2009). In particular, social support acts as an

important job resource because, despite its daily fluctuations, it is related to work
engagement, job satisfaction, and mental health. Further, we controlled for general
levels of the outcome variables. By controlling for the participants’ general level of
work engagement and outcome variables (job satisfaction and mental health), it was
possible to mitigate some forms of confounding (Tennen & Affleck, 2002). These
results suggest that, regardless of general levels of work engagement and the other
outcome variables (i.e., job satisfaction and mental health) as well as the fact that
levels of support may vary from day to day, co-workers’ support impacts these
variables. Therefore, teachers who receive adequate support from colleagues are
more likely to be engaged in their work. In turn, they are also more satisfied and
enjoy better health (Halbesleben, 2006).
In regard to the health impairment process, the results of this study again
confirmed the hypotheses. Particularly, teachers who were unable to effectively
manage their professional and family roles were more likely to be exhausted. This
negatively affected their job satisfaction as well as their mental health. This is
because many female teachers attribute importance to both their work role and their
family role. In addition, they share certain work/family conflict issues with other
female professionals. For example, Cinamon and Rich (2005) have shown that the
combination of being a teacher and a mother is not easy for teachers. In addition,
they report that teachers are often forced into working ‘‘triple-shifts,’’ including
teaching, housework, and childcare. This is also consistent with earlier findings of
Sonnentag (2001) who, in a multilevel study among Dutch teachers, showed that
work-related activities pursued at home had a negative impact on individuals’
situational well-being. We agree with Sonnentag (2001) that this is particularly
important in the contemporary age, in which the widespread use of technologies
(e.g., mobile telephones and electronic mail) enables individuals to stay connected
with work while at home and renders the boundaries between work and non-work
time increasingly permeable.

Limitations
This study is not without limitations. First, it only focuses on teachers, which
restricts the generalizability of the results to individuals in other occupations.
Therefore, we suggest that other organizational contexts should be studied in future
research. Second, the data analyzed was derived entirely from self-report ques-
tionnaires, which increased the likelihood of common method variance effects. It
 580 S. Simbula

might be interesting to gather data on both teachers’ self-assessments and principals’

assessments to compare their perceptions of the stressors that teachers experience,
their amount of job resources, and their health. Moreover, in the present study,
operationalizations of some of the day-level variables may appear rather weak. We
used modified ‘‘trait-type’’ scales in order to assess their daily variations and
interrelations. However, diary studies should rely on constructs and scales that were
originally developed to capture daily fluctuation in emotions, moods, or psycho-
physiology. Therefore, we suggest that future researchers should develop day-specific
measures. This also refers to the conceptual question concerning the ways in which
such variables manifest themselves at the day level. Third, we focused on only one
indicator of job demand (i.e., work/family conflict) and one indicator of job resource
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

(i.e., co-workers’ support). However, this was also necessary due to exigencies
associated with the use of diaries. In order to avoid repeated queries and responses,
which placed unnecessary demands on participants, researchers usually design diary
instruments that are short and take a short time to complete (Bolger, Davis, &
Rafaeli, 2003). Fourth, we measured co-workers’ support with only one item. This
may be problematic to the extent that single-item measures are usually more
susceptible to errors than multi-item measures. Therefore, we recommend that future
researchers should use multi-item scales in order to increase the internal consistency
of the tests.
Finally, in this study, we examined only the main effects of job demands and
resources, neglecting possible cross-level interactions. The JD
R model proposes that
the interaction between job demands and job resources is important for the
development of job strain and motivation. In addition, it presumes that job
resources may buffer the impact of job demands on job strain, including burnout
(Bakker, Demerouti, & Euwema, 2005), whereas job resources influence motivation
or work engagement when job demands are high (Bakker, Hakanen, Demerouti, &
Xanthopoulou, 2007). Future researchers should focus on the most theoretically
prominent interactions depending on the occupational setting.

Final note and directions for future research

The current study has extended upon previous research on the JD
R model. In
addition, the findings confirmed those from earlier cross-sectional, longitudinal, and
diary studies, which supported the model’s main assumptions (Bakker & Demerouti,
2007). This study’s results suggest that the predictor variables have short-term effects
on some outcomes (i.e., exhaustion, work engagement, job satisfaction, and mental
health). However, it would be also interesting to investigate whether specific job
demands, job resources, and personal resources also have positive long-term
consequences on these and/or other outcome variables. At the same time, some
researchers have shown that job characteristics and well-being outcomes seem to
influence each other, which suggests that it is important to think in terms of
reciprocity. That is, it seems logical that a model with opposite pathways is valid as
well. For example, reversed causation has been found between social support and
mental health (Schwarzer, Hahn, & Jerusalem, 1993), job demands (a composite
measure, including time pressure, hard work, and job complexity) and emotional
exhaustion (De Jonge et al., 2001). In addition, reverse causation has been found
between job demands, work-home interference, and general health (Van der Heijden,
 Anxiety, Stress, & Coping 581

Demerouti, & Bakker, 2008). There is consequently a need for more longitudinal
and diary studies so that reciprocal gain and loss relationships can be further
investigated in the context of the JD
R model. Finally, we suggest that future
researchers should integrate different theoretical and methodological approaches in
order to gain a better understanding of the dynamic and multifaceted nature of well-
being at work.

Acknowledgements
The author thanks Eva Demerouti and Despoina Xanthopoulou for their advice on multilevel
analyses. I thank Joachim Stoeber and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments and
suggestions on earlier versions of this article.
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

References
Allen, T.D., Herst, D.E.L., Bruck, C.S., & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences associated with
work-to-family conflict: A review and agenda for further research. Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 5, 278
308. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.5.2.278
Bakker, A.B. (2005). Flow among music teachers and their students: The crossover of peak
experiences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 26
44. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2003.11.001
Bakker, A.B. (2009). Building engagement in the workplace. In C. Cooper & R. Burke (Eds.),
The peak performing organization (pp. 50
72). Oxon: Routledge.
Bakker, A.B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands-Resources model: State of the art.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309
328. doi: 10.1108/02683940710733115
Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E., & Euwema, M.C. (2005). Job resources buffer the impact of job
demands on burnout. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10, 170
180. doi: 10.1037/
1076-8998.10.2.170
Bakker, A.B., Hakanen, J., Demerouti, E., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2007). Job resources boost
work engagement, particularly when job demands are high. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 99, 274
284. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.274
Bakker, A.B., Van Emmerik, I.J.H., & Euwema, M.C. (2006). Crossover of burnout and
engagement in work teams. Work & Occupations, 33, 464
489. doi: 10.1177/
0730888406291310
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173
1182.
Bolger, N., Davis, A., & Rafaeli, E. (2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual
Review of Psychology, 54, 579
616. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145030
Brief, A.P. (1998). Attitudes in and around organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Britt, T.W., Castro, C.A., & Adler, A.B. (2005). Self engagement, stressors, and health: A
longitudinal study. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1475
1486. doi: 10.1177/
0146167205276525
Butler, A.B., Grzywacz, J.G., Bass, B.L., & Linney, K.D. (2005). Extending the demands-
control model: A daily diary study of job characteristics, work-family conflict and work-
family facilitation. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78, 155
169. doi:
10.1348/096317905X40097
Cenni, P., & Barbieri, F. (1997). Karasek’s Job Content Questionnaire: Una versione italiana
tradotta e adattata [The Italian adaptation of the Karasek’s Job Content Questionnaire].
Unpublished research report.
Cinamon, R.G., & Rich, Y. (2005). Work-family conflict among female teachers. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 21, 365
378. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2004.06.009
Conway, N., & Briner, R.B. (2002). A daily diary study of affective responses to psychological
contract breach and exceeded promises. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 287
302.
doi: 10.1002/job.139
De Jonge, J., Dormann, C., Janssen, P.P.M., Dollard, M.F., Landeweerd, J.A., & Nijhuis,
F.J.N. (2001). Testing reciprocal relationships between job characteristics and psychological
 582 S. Simbula

well-being: A cross lagged structural equation model. Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology, 74, 29
46. doi: 10.1348/096317901167217
Deci, W.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2000). The ‘‘what’’ and ‘‘why’’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and
the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 319
338. doi: 10.1207/
S15327965PLI1104_01
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A.B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2001). The Job Demands-
Resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 499
512. doi: 10.1037/0021-
9010.86.3.499
Fraccaroli, F., & Schadee, H.M. (1993). L’analisi fattoriale confermativa applicata al General
Health Questionnaire: Una comparazione della versione inglese e italiana [Confirmatory
factor analysis applied to General Health Questionnaire: A comparison of the English and
Italian versions]. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 20, 319
388.
George, J.M. (1991). State or trait: Effects of positive mood on prosocial behaviors at work.
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 299
307. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.76.2.299

Goldberg, D. (1992). General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Windsor: NFER-Nelson.
Greenhaus, J.H., & Beutell, N. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles.
Academy of Management Review, 10, 76
88. doi: 10.2307/258214
Guglielmi, D., Paplomatas, A., Simbula, S., & Depolo, M. (in press). Prevenzione dello stress
lavoro-correlato: Validazione di uno strumento per la valutazione dei rischi psicosociali nella
scuola [Prevention of work-related stress: Validation of a tool to psychosocial risk factors
evaluation in the school context]. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Hakanen, J., Bakker, A.B., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2006). Burnout and work engagement among
teachers. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 495
513. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2005.11.001
Halbesleben, J.R.B. (2006). Sources of social support and burnout: A meta-analytic test of the
conservation of resources model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1134
1145. doi:
10.1037/0021-9010.91.5.1134
Halbesleben, J.R.B., & Demerouti, E. (2005). The construct validity of an alternative measure
of burnout: Investigating the English translation of the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory. Work
& Stress, 19, 208
220. doi: 10.1080/02678370500340728
Hockey, G.J. (1997). Compensatory control in the regulation of human performance under
stress and high workload: A cognitive-energetical framework. Biological Psychology, 45, 73

93. doi: 10.1016/S0301-0511(96)05223-4
Hofmann, D.A., & Gavin, M.B. (1998). Centering decisions in hierarchical linear models:
Implications for research in organizations. Journal of Management, 24, 623
641. doi:
10.1177/014920639802400504
Hox, J. (2002). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ilies, R., & Judge, T.A. (2002). Understanding the dynamic relationships among personality,
mood, and job satisfaction: A field experience-sampling study. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 89, 1119
1139. doi: 10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00018-3
Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Bono, J.E., & Patton, G.K. (2001). The job satisfaction-job
performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127,
376
407. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.127.3.376
Kahn, W.A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at
work. The Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692
724. doi: 10.2307/256287
Karasek, R. (1985). Job Content Questionnaire. Los Angeles, CA: Department of Industrial
and Systems Engineering, University of Southern California.
Karasek, R.A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for
job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285
308. doi: 10.2307/2392498
Kelchtermans, G., & Strittmatter, A. (1999). Beyond individual burnout: A perspective for
improved school. Guidelines for the prevention of burnout. In R. Vandenberghe & M.
Huberman (Eds.), Understanding and preventing teacher burnout (pp. 304
314). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Lewig, K., & Dollard, M. (2003). Emotional dissonance, emotional exhaustion and job
satisfaction in call center workers. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,
12, 366
392. doi: 10.1080/13594320344000200
 Anxiety, Stress, & Coping 583

Maslach, C., Jackson, S.E., & Schwab, R.L. (1996). Maslach Burnout Inventory-Educators
Survey (MBI-ES). In C. Maslach, S.E. Jackson, & M.P. Leiter (Eds.), MBI manual (3rd ed.).
Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
Maslach, C., Leiter, M.P., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2008). Measuring burnout. In C.L. Cooper &
S. Cartwright (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational well-being (pp. 86
108).
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Matthiesen, S.B., Aasen, B., Holst, G., Wie, K., & Einarsen, S. (2003). The escalation of
conflict: A case study of bullying at work. International Journal of Management and Decision
Making, 4, 96
112. doi: 10.1504/IJMDM.2003.002491
Meijman, T.F., & Mulder, G. (1998). Psychological aspects of workload. In P.J.D. Drenth &
H. Thierry (Eds.), Handbook of work and organizational psychology: Vol. 2. Work psychology
(pp. 5
33). Hove: Psychology Press.
Montgomery, C., & Rupp, A.A. (2005). Meta-analysis for exploring the diverse causes and
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

effects of stress in teachers. Canadian Journal of Education, 28, 458
486.

Patrick, B.C., Hisley, J., & Kempler, T. (2000). What’s everybody so excited about? The effects
of teacher enthusiasm on student intrinsic motivation and vitality. Journal of Experimental
Education, 68, 217
236. doi: 10.1080/00220970009600093
Rashbash, J., Browne, W., Healy, M., Cameron, B., & Charlton, C. (2000). MLwiN (Version
1.10.006): Interactive software for multilevel analysis. London: Multilevel Models Project,
Institute of Education, University of London.
Roth, G., Assor, A., Kanat-Maymon, Y., & Kaplan, H. (2007). Autonomous motivation for
teaching: How self-determined teaching may lead to self-determined learning. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 99, 761
774. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.4.761
Schaufeli, W.B., & Bakker, A.B. (2004). Job demands, job resources and their relationship with
burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25,
293
315. doi: 10.1002/job.248
Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement
with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 66, 701
716. doi: 10.1177/0013164405282471
Schaufeli, W.B., & Salanova, M. (2008). Enhancing work engagement through the manage-
ment of human resources. In K. Näswall, M. Sverke, & J. Hellgren (Eds.), The individual in
the changing working life (pp. 380
404). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Gonzáles-Romá, V., & Bakker, A.B. (2002). The measurement
of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal
of Happiness Studies, 3, 71
92. doi: 10.1023/A:1015630930326
Schaufeli, W.B., Taris, T., Le Blanc, P., Peeters, M., Bakker, A.B., & De Jonge, J. (2001). Maakt
arbeid gezond? Op zoek naar de bevlogen werknemer [Does work make healthy? The quest
for the engaged worker]. De Psycholoog, 36, 422
428.
Schwarzer, R., Hahn, A., & Jerusalem, M. (1993). Negative effect in East German migrants:
Longitudinal effects of unemployment and social support. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 6, 57

69. doi: 10.1080/10615809308249532
Simbula, S. (2009). Preliminary analyses for checking the psychometric properties of diary
instruments. Unpublished raw data.
Simbula, S., Guglielmi, D., Schaufeli, W.B., & Depolo, M. (in press). An Italian validation of
the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Characterization of profiles in a sample of school
teachers. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Sirigatti, S., & Stefanile, C. (1993). Maslach Burnout Inventory: adattamento e taratura per
l’Italia [The Italian adaptation of the Maslach Burnout Inventory]. Florence: O.S.
Organizzazioni Speciali.
Sonnenschein, M., Sorbi, M.J., van Doornen, L.J.P., Schaufeli, W.B., & Maas, C.J.M. (2007).
Electronic diary evidence on energy erosion in clinical burnout. Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 12, 402
413. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.12.4.402
Sonnentag, S. (2001). Work, recovery activities, and individual well-being: A diary study.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 196
210. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.6.3.196
Sonnentag, S. (2003). Recovery, work engagement, and proactive behavior: A new look at the
interface between non-work and work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 518
528. doi:
10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.518
 584 S. Simbula

Sonnentag, S. (2005). Burnout research: Adding an off-work and day-level perspective. Work
and Stress, 19, 271
275. doi: 10.1080/02678370500386473
Sonnentag, S., Mojza, E.J., Binnewies, C., & Scholl, A. (2008). Being engaged at work and
detached at home: A week-level study on work engagement, psychological detachment and
affect. Work and Stress, 22, 257
276. doi: 10.1080/02678370802379440
Spencer, D.A. (1986). Contemporary women teachers: Balancing school and home. New York:
Longman.
Staw, B.M., & Ross, J. (1985). Stability in the midst of change: A dispositional approach to job
attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 469
480. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.70.3.469
Stone, A., Reed, B., & Neale, J. (1987). Changes in daily event frequency precede episodes of
physical symptoms. Journal of Human Stress, 13, 70
74.
Tennen, H., & Affleck, G. (2002). The challenge of capturing daily processes at the interface of
social and clinical psychology. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 21, 610
627. doi:
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 10:14 25 December 2014

10.1521/jscp.21.6.610.22796
Tourangeau, R., Rips, L.J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van der Heijden, B.I.J.M., Demerouti, E., & Bakker, A.B. (2008). Work-home interference
among nurses: Reciprocal relationships with job demands and health. Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 62, 572
584. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04630.x
Wanous, J.P., Reichers, A.E., & Hudy, M.J. (1997). Overall job satisfaction: How good are
single-item measures? Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 247
252. doi: 10.1037/0021-
9010.82.2.247
Weiss, H.M., Nicholas, J.P., & Daus, C.S. (1999). An examination of the joint effects of
affective experiences and job beliefs on job satisfaction and variations in affective
experiences over time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78, 1
24.
doi: 10.1006/obhd.1999.2824
Westman, M. (2001). Stress and strain crossover. Human Relations, 54, 717
751. doi: 10.1177/
0018726701546002
Wright, T.A., Cropanzano, R., & Meyer, D.G. (2004). State and trait correlates of job
performance: A tale of two perspectives. Journal of Business and Psychology, 18, 365
383.
doi: 10.1023/B:JOBU.0000016708.22925.72
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2009). Work engagement
and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources. Journal of
Organizational and Occupational Psychology, 82, 183
200. doi: 10.1348/096317908X285633
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A.B., Heuven, E., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2008).
Working in the sky: A diary study among flight attendants. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 13, 345
356. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.13.4.345
Yeo, G.B., & Neal, A. (2004). A multilevel analysis of effort, practice, and performance:
Effects of ability, conscientiousness, and goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89,
231
247. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.231