International Journal of Stress Management © 2016 American Psychological Association

2018, Vol. 25, No. 1, 96 –108 1072-5245/18/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/str0000050

Psychological Empowerment and Burnout: Different Patterns of

Relationship With Three Types of Job Demands

Yael Livne and Sarit Rashkovits

Max Stern Yezreel Valley College, Yezreel Valley, Israel

Considering the diverse forms of job demands characteristic of the modern workplace, this
study aims to acknowledge and test the distinct relationships between 3 types of job
demands (i.e., quantitative, emotional, and mental) and employees’ psychological states of
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

burnout and empowerment. Based on intrinsic motivation and learning perspectives, the
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

main proposition of this study is that different types of demands distinctly affect employees’
outcomes, such that mental demands are positively related to psychological empowerment
and are negatively related to burnout, whereas quantitative demands show an opposite
pattern. We further suggest that emotional demands are positively related to burnout but are
unrelated to psychological empowerment. The hypotheses were tested using 2 samples of
1,005 employees (495 employees in the first sample and 510 in the second sample, 1 year
later). In both samples a CFA analysis supported the 3-factor model of job demands over
alternative models. Moreover, in both samples, the hypotheses were fully supported by
multiple regression analyses, demonstrating the predicted unique relationship patterns of
each type of job demand with the employees’ psychological states of burnout and empow-
erment. Additionally, psychological empowerment mediated the effect of mental demands
on burnout, and mental demands mediated the effect of job tenure on both psychological
empowerment and burnout. These findings contribute to the existing literature on job
demands, and hold practical implications for job design.

Keywords: job demands, burnout, psychological empowerment

The 21st century workplace is often charac-
terized as being extremely demanding, and its
implications for employees are of major interest
for organizational research. Although many
studies show that prolonged and intensive de-
mands produce stress and lead to burnout (Bak-
ker & Demerouti, 2007; Maslach, Schaufeli, &
Leiter, 2001), at the same time, the literature
often describes mentally demanding jobs as be-
ing motivating and empowering (Seibert,
Wang, & Courtright, 2011; Spreitzer, 2008).
This article was published Online First November 21,
2016.
Yael Livne, Department of Human Services, Max Stern
Yezreel Valley College, Yezreel Valley, Israel; Sarit Rash-
kovits, Department of Health System Management, Max
Stern Yezreel Valley College.
The basic idea of the manuscript and some of the results
were orally presented at a conference (STAR conference,
July 2016).
Correspondence concerning this article should be ad-
dressed to Yael Livne, Department of Human Services, Max
Stern Yezreel Valley College, Yezreel Valley 19300, Israel.
E-mail: yaelliv@yvc.ac.il
96
Reviewing these two streams of literature raises
the question of whether different types of de-
mands distinctly affect employees. Considering
new types of demands generated by the modern
work environment (Cooper, Dewe, &
O’Driscoll, 2001; Demerouti, Bakker, Nach-
reiner, & Schaufeli, 2001; Kubicek, Korunka, &
Ulferts, 2013), there is a need to explore the
relationships between different types of job de-
mands and various employees’ outcomes. Ac-
cordingly, the present study aims to identify the
unique relationship patterns of three types of job
demands (quantitative, mental, and emotional)
with employees’ job related psychological
states.
Theoretical Background and Hypotheses
Development
Job demands. Researchers often use the
term “job demands” to refer to quantitative de-
mands, such as workload or lack of time. How-
ever, other types of demands also play an im-
portant role in the modern workplace (Cooper et
al., 2001; Demerouti et al., 2001; Kubicek et al.,
 PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT, BURNOUT, AND JOB DEMANDS
2013). Specifically, complex work environ-
ments and technological developments have
created new cognitive demands, and the ex-
panding service industry has given rise to emo-
tional demands. The existence of these three
different types of job demands, that is, quanti-
tative, emotional, and mental, was empirically
supported in a study by Peeters, Montgomery,
Bakker, and Schaufeli (2005), who found a
three-factor model of demands: Quantitative
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
demands refer to work overload, time pressure,
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
and the requirement for many work hours, or for
a high-speed pace of work. Employees facing
quantitative demands have to maintain a high
level of activity or intense behavior in order to
accomplish their tasks (Van Yperen & Janssen,
2002). Mental demands refer to the cognitive
component of work and the degree to which the
investment of mental resources (e.g., thought,
memory, information processing, and attention)
is required from the worker. Emotional de-
mands describe the degree to which the job puts
the employee in emotionally stressful situations,
or the extent of emotional resources invested by
employees in their work (Peeters et al., 2005).
A well-known theory relating different work
stressors to different workers’ outcomes is the
challenge stressor – hindrance stressor frame-
work (Lepine, Podsakoff, & Lepine, 2005; Pod-
sakoff, LePine, & LePine, 2007). It refers to job
hindrances as work stressors that drain employ-
ees’ energy, elicit negative emotions, and inter-
fere with goal achievement and well-being. In
contrast, job challenges are aspects of work that
may deplete employees’ energy, but at the same
time stimulate their curiosity, competence, and
thoroughness, and enhance goal achievement.
According to this conceptualization, because
challenge stressors deplete energy but are also
associated with favorable outcomes such as job
accomplishment, they relate positively to two
opposite poles: to strain and burnout as well as
to motivation. However, the challenge– hin-
drance framework refers to a wide variety of
stressors in the work environment, and does not
specifically distinguish between different job
demands and their unique effects on employees.
For that reason, in the present study, we suggest
and empirically test propositions regarding the
unique relationship of each of the three types of
job demands with two psychological states of
employees (i.e., burnout and psychological em-
powerment). The psychological states of burn-
97
out and empowerment were chosen with the
purpose of covering an inclusive range of dif-
ferent aspects of employees’ job related well-
being. These well-established multidimensional
constructs do not represent two opposite poles
of the same phenomenon; Whereas burnout is
more health-related, psychological empower-
ment is a motivational construct.
Burnout and psychological empowerment.
Burnout is conceptualized as a psychological
syndrome of physical and emotional exhaus-
tion, feelings of cynicism and detachment, and
perceptions of reduced personal accomplish-
ment, resulting from exposure to chronic job
stressors (Leiter & Maslach, 2004). Theories on
occupational stress maintain that burnout is of-
ten a result of prolonged and extensive job
demands, (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Hobfoll,
1989; Karasek & Theorell, 1990; Maslach et al.,
2001).
Psychological empowerment (Spreitzer,
1995) is a state of increased intrinsic motivation
manifested in a set of four dimensions: mean-
ing, competence, self-determination, and im-
pact. The literature often describes mentally de-
manding jobs as psychologically empowering
(Spreitzer, 2008). For example, jobs that de-
mand extensive information processing, consid-
ering choices, and participating in decision
making were found to be psychologically em-
powering (Wallach & Mueller, 2006).
Burnout and psychological empowerment are
both outcomes of the interaction between the
employee and his work environment. Yet they
represent incongruent job experiences and typ-
ically lead to contradictory work outcomes;
whereas burnout leads to decreased perfor-
mance and increased absenteeism (Swider &
Zimmerman, 2010; Taris, 2006), psychological
empowerment is associated with increased per-
formance and organizational commitment
(Ahearne, Mathieu, & Rapp, 2005; Avolio, Zhu,
Koh, & Bhatia, 2004; Gardner, Wright, &
Moynihan, 2011).
We propose that the three types of job de-
mands have distinct characteristics and there-
fore may have different relationships with em-
ployees’ psychological states. Specifically, we
argue that mental demands are intrinsically mo-
tivating because they hold the potential to in-
crease interest, growth, fulfilment, and enjoy-
ment, whereas quantitative and emotional
demands do not. On the other hand, quantitative
 98 LIVNE AND RASHKOVITS
demands require doing a lot or doing more of
the same within a short period of time, and
emotional demands expose employees to emo-
tionally stressful situations that drain their en-
ergy and are positively related to stress and
burnout.
Different patterns of relationship between
three types of demands and burnout and
psychological empowerment. The positive
relationship between quantitative job demands
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
and occupational stress and burnout has been
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
theoretically established and empirically sup-
ported (e.g., Leiter & Stright, 2009). However,
we suggest that mental job demands may have
an empowering effect on employees. This prop-
osition is based on Hackman and Oldham’s
(1976) model of job characteristics, according
to which skill variety leads to meaningfulness
and thus to higher intrinsic motivation. In other
words, it is not the amount of work that leads to
intrinsic motivation, but its variety, that is, the
mental stimulation it provides to the worker that
has an inner motivating potential (Wielenga-
Meijer, Taris, Kompier, & Wigboldus, 2010).
Kraimer, Seibert, and Liden (1999) linked
Hackman and Oldham’s job characteristics to
the four dimensions of psychological empower-
ment, and found that the dimension of job
meaningfulness was related to the experience of
meaning in the job characteristics model. Con-
gruently, it was found that skill variety posi-
tively affected the meaning dimension of em-
powerment (Liden, Wayne, & Sparrowe, 2000).
Other scholars recently argued that skill variety
enhances other components of psychological
empowerment, such as competence, and they
supported this argument with the results of a
meta-analysis (Seibert et al., 2011).
Furthermore, according to action theory (Fr-
ese & Zapf, 1994) as well as to demands-
resources theory (Demerouti et al., 2001;
Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Schaufeli, Bakker,
& van Rhenen, 2009), high demands supported
by the necessary time frame may provide work-
ers with opportunities to develop their skills,
challenge them to learn new coping techniques,
and thus provide them with opportunities for
personal and professional growth. In other
words, when job demands are mentally stimu-
lating but not quantitatively demanding, they
initiate learning and developmental processes.
However, given time pressure, employees have
little opportunity to engage in learning and they
tend to revert to prior “automatized” behavior
(Frese & Zapf, 1994; Pomaki, Maes, & ter
Doest, 2004). In fact, Wallach and Mueller
(2006) found that work overload (i.e., quantita-
tive demands) reduced psychological empower-
ment. Consequently, we suggest that mental
demands are positively related to psychological
empowerment and negatively related to burn-
out, whereas quantitative demands are posi-
tively related to burnout and negatively related
to psychological empowerment.
As for emotional demands, because they in-
volve dealing with aversive emotional situa-
tions and require the exertion of an excessive
emotional effort, they are expected to deplete
employees’ energy and increase burnout, as was
previously demonstrated (e.g., Carlson, Fergu-
son, Hunter, & Whitten, 2012; Sliter, Jex, Wol-
ford, & McInnerney, 2010). The effect of emo-
tional demands on psychological empowerment
has not been studied directly, to the best of our
knowledge. Nonetheless, these aversive experi-
ences do not seem to be related to meaning,
self-determination, impact, or self-efficacy (the
four components of psychological empower-
ment).
Taken together, each category of job de-
mands may exhibit a unique relationship with
health-related (i.e., burnout) and motivational
(i.e., empowerment) indicators of employees’
well-being, as shown in Figure 1.
Based on this theoretical analysis, the specific
objectives of the present research are to explore
the different patterns of relationship of each
type of job demand with burnout and psycho-
Figure 1. The hypothesized research model.
 PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT, BURNOUT, AND JOB DEMANDS
logical empowerment. We further aim to exam-
ine the mediating role of psychological empow-
erment in the indirect effect of mental demands
on burnout. Therefore, we present the following
hypotheses:
H1(a): There will be a positive relation-
ship between mental demands and psycho-
logical empowerment.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
H1(b): There will be a negative relation-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
ship between quantitative demands and
psychological empowerment.
H1(c): There will be no relationship be-
tween emotional demands and psycholog-
ical empowerment.
H2(a): There will be a negative relation-
ship between mental demands and burnout.
H2(b): There will be a positive relation-
ship between quantitative demands and
burnout.
H2(c): There will be a positive relationship
between emotional demands and burnout.
H3: There will be an indirect negative ef-
fect of mental demands on burnout medi-
ated by psychological empowerment.
We further suggest that employees with
higher job tenure feel more empowered. Past
research raises support for the positive relation-
ship between job tenure and psychological em-
powerment (e.g., Dickson & Lorenz, 2009;
Kruja, Ha, Drishti, & Oelfke, 2016). Several
studies also reported a negative relationship be-
tween tenure and burnout (e.g., Attafar, Asl, &
Shahin, 2011; Karatepe & Aleshinloye, 2009;
Karatepe & Uludag, 2007). Advancement to
higher organizational positions is usually asso-
ciated with higher job tenure. Furthermore, high
organizational rank is typically characterized by
more mental demands, likely to enhance psy-
chological empowerment and reduce burnout.
Thus:
H4(a): There will be an indirect negative
effect of tenure on burnout mediated by
mental demands.
H4(b): There will be an indirect positive
effect of tenure on psychological empow-
erment mediated by mental demands.
99
Method
Sample
The study was conducted with two conve-
nience samples. The first sample included 495
employees (64% female) in various public
(46%) and private (54%) organizations in north-
ern Israel. The size of the organizations ranged
up to 3,700 employees (M ⫽ 797.77, SD ⫽
2,598.24). The age range of the employees was
up to 65 years (M ⫽ 33.82, SD ⫽ 9.96), and
tenure ranged up to 37 years (M ⫽ 5.96, SD ⫽
6.65, median ⫽ 3 years). Thirty-three percent of
the employees were employed in managerial
roles, with no significant gender difference. The
second sample included 510 employees (33.5%
male) in various public (35%) and private
(65%) organizations in northern Israel. The size
of the organizations ranged up to 13,000 em-
ployees (M ⫽ 444.39, SD ⫽ 1,233.185). The
age range of the employees was up to 69 years
(M ⫽ 33.08, SD ⫽ 11.24), and tenure ranged up
to 40 years (M ⫽ 5.25, SD ⫽ 6.50). Twenty-
nine percent of the employees were employed in
managerial roles, with no significant gender dif-
ference.
Procedure
Data from the second sample were collected
a year after the first sample. In both samples,
participation in the study was voluntary. The
research questionnaire was administered to the
participants by research assistants after the an-
onymity of their responses was guaranteed.
Measures
Data was obtained using participants’ self-
reports, because employees are best suited to
report their subjective states of psychological
empowerment and burnout. Furthermore, ac-
cording to cognitive evaluation theory (Lazarus
& Folkman, 1984), job demands evaluations are
based on subjective judgments, therefore self-
reporting seems most appropriate. Because we
aimed to point to the different relationship pat-
terns (directions) of each of the three types of
demands with the two employees’ psychologi-
cal states, common source and common method
bias are not relevant (Lance, Dawson,
Birkelbach, & Hoffman, 2010; Lindell & Whit-
ney, 2001).
 100 LIVNE AND RASHKOVITS
Job demands were measured using three
scales taken from the Dutch Questionnaire on
the Experience and Evaluation of Work (Van
Veldhoven & Meijman, 1994). This measure is
well-established and validated. All items were
scored on a 5-point scale (1 - never, 5 - almost
always).
Quantitative job demands. Contains four
items; sample item: “Do you have too much
work to do?” Reliability analysis yielded Cron-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
bach’s alpha ⫽ .72 in the first sample and
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Cronbach’s alpha ⫽ .74 in the second sample.
Emotional job demands. contains five
items; sample item: “Do you have contact with
difficult clients or patients in your work?” Re-
liability analysis yielded Cronbach’s alpha ⫽
.74 in the first sample and Cronbach’s alpha ⫽
.70 in the second sample.
Mental job demands. contains five items;
sample item: “Does your work require continual
thought?” Reliability analysis yielded Cron-
bach’s alpha ⫽ .87 in the first sample and
Cronbach’s alpha ⫽ .84 in the second sample.
For confirming the fit of the proposed three-
factor model of job demands (mental, quantita-
tive, and emotional) over other possible models,
we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA) on these three scales. The fit of the
model was assessed with the goodness-of-fit
index (GFI), the root-mean-square error of ap-
proximation (RMSEA), and Akaike Informa-
tion Criterion (AIC). As can be seen in Table 1,
for both samples, all the indices of the three-
factor model are satisfactory and indicate a bet-
ter fit of the three-factor model than of the other
models.
Burnout. Was assessed by the short version
of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (Iverson,
Olekalns, & Erwin, 1998). It included emotional
Table 1
Results of CFA For Job Demands (Sample 1 and Sample 2)
Model
Three-factors model
Two-factors model (Emotional demands vs others)
Two-factors model (Mental demands vs others)
Two-factors model (Quantitative demands vs others)
One-factor model
Note. CFA ⫽ confirmatory factor analysis; RMSEA ⫽ root-mean square error of approximation; GFI ⫽ goodness-of-fit
index; AIC ⫽ Akaike Information Criterion.
exhaustion (3 items, e.g., “I feel emotionally
drained from my work”), depersonalization (3
items, e.g., “I don’t really care what happens to
some clients”), and reduced personal accomplish-
ment (3 items, e.g., “I have accomplished many
worthwhile things in this job”). All items were
scored on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to
5 (almost always). Reliability analysis yielded
Cronbach’s alpha ⫽ .76 in the first sample and
Cronbach’s alpha ⫽ .74 in the second sample.
Psychological empowerment. was as-
sessed by Spreitzer’s (1995) 12-item empower-
ment scale. It included meaning (3 items, e.g.,
“The work I do is meaningful to me”), compe-
tence (3 items, e.g., “I am self-assured about my
capabilities to perform my work activities”),
self-determination (3 items, e.g., “I can decide
on my own how to go about doing my work”),
and impact (3 items, e.g., “My impact on what
happens in my work group is large”). All items
were scored on a 5-point scale ranging from 1
(never) to 5 (almost always). Reliability analy-
sis yielded Cronbach’s alpha ⫽ .91 in the first
sample, and Cronbach’s alpha ⫽ .87 in the
second sample.
Control variables. The employee gender,
age, role type (managerial/non managerial), job
tenure, and number of children under age 18
were considered. The organization size (number
of employees) and the organization type (pri-
vate/public) were considered as well.
Data Analysis
The research hypotheses were examined us-
ing two multiple regression analyses for each
sample: one regression for psychological em-
powerment as the dependent variable and the
second for burnout. Each multiple regression
RMSEA GFI AIC
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 1 Sample 2
.08 .10 .94 .92 247.01 382.25
.15 .14 .84 .83 623.93 590.35
.18 .16 .78 .83 912.02 730.21
.19 .17 .75 .77 987.85 834.78
.18 .16 .76 .79 915.36 761.13
 PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT, BURNOUT, AND JOB DEMANDS 101

Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed); gender: 1 ⫽ male, 2 ⫽ female; managerial role: 1 ⫽ yes, 2 ⫽ no;
included all three types of job demands as ex-

1.00
⫺.06
11
planatory variables, so each type of demands
controlled for the effects of the others.

⫺.17ⴱⴱ
.18ⴱⴱ
1.00
10
Results

⫺.14ⴱⴱ
Descriptive Statistics

⫺.10ⴱ
1.00

.05
9
Tables 2 and 3 present the means, standard
deviations, and correlations among the study

⫺.15ⴱⴱ
.22ⴱⴱ
⫺.14ⴱⴱ
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

1.00

⫺.01
variables. In both samples, managerial role had

8
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

a significant negative correlation with mental

demands (r ⫽ ⫺0.15, p ⬍ .01 in sample 1; r ⫽

.40ⴱⴱ
⫺.22ⴱⴱ
.69ⴱⴱ
⫺.14ⴱⴱ
.16ⴱⴱ
⫺0.25, p ⬍ .01 in sample 2), with emotional

1.00
7
demands (r ⫽ ⫺0.11, p ⬍ .05 in sample 1; r ⫽
⫺0.18, p ⬍ .01 in sample 2), and with psycho-
logical empowerment (r ⫽ ⫺0.30, p ⬍ .01 in

⫺.002

⫺.10ⴱ
1.00
⫺.04

.01
⫺.06

⫺.03
sample 1; r ⫽ ⫺0.32, p ⬍ .01 in sample 2).

6
As shown in Tables 2 and 3, in both samples
there was a significant negative correlation be-

⫺.22ⴱⴱ
⫺.15ⴱⴱ
⫺.10ⴱ

.10ⴱ
⫺.11ⴱ
tween burnout and gender (r ⫽ ⫺0.10, p ⬍ .05;

1.00

.07
⫺.07
5
r ⫽ ⫺0.10, p ⬍ .05), and between burnout and
organization type (r ⫽ ⫺0.15, p ⬍ .01; r ⫽

⫺.51ⴱⴱ

.31ⴱⴱ
.25ⴱⴱ
⫺.30ⴱⴱ
.19ⴱⴱ
⫺.15ⴱⴱ
⫺0.15, p ⬍ .01). Due to the low size of these
1.00

.07

.05
4

correlations, we further conducted independent

samples T test analyses to examine burnout
Sample 1 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations Between Study Variables

differences by gender as well as by organization

.18ⴱⴱ

⫺.16ⴱⴱ
⫺.11ⴱ
1.00
.07

.02
⫺.07
.01

⫺.02

⫺.04
3

type. In both samples, a significant difference

was found between men and women in the level
of burnout, such that men reported a higher
.33ⴱⴱ

.26ⴱⴱ

⫺.001
.11ⴱ

level of burnout (M ⫽ 2.55, SD ⫽ 0.67 in

1.00

⫺.04

.03
.02

⫺.06

⫺.08
.02
2

sample 1; M ⫽ 3.44, SD ⫽ 1.31 in sample 2) in

comparison to women (M ⫽ 2.42, SD ⫽ 0.63 in
.32ⴱⴱ
.24ⴱⴱ
.52ⴱⴱ
⫺.28ⴱⴱ

.28ⴱⴱ
.18ⴱⴱ
⫺.15ⴱⴱ
.24ⴱⴱ
⫺.15ⴱⴱ

sample 1; M ⫽ 3.14, SD ⫽ 1.23 in sample 2)

1.00

.07

.08
1

(t492 ⫽ 2.20, p ⬍ .05 in sample 1; t504 ⫽ 2.51,

p ⬍ .05 in sample 2). Regarding organization
ⴱⴱ

type, independent samples T test analyses

.84
.80
.87
.71
.65

9.96
1.36

6.65

2598.24
SD

Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed).

yielded a significant difference between public

and private organizations in the level of burnout
in sample 2 only, such that employees in private
4.09
3.34
3.16
3.98
2.47

33.82
1.28

5.96

797.77

organization type: 1 ⫽ public, 2 ⫽ private.

Mean

organizations reported a significantly higher

level of burnout (M ⫽ 3.43, SD ⫽ 1.27) in
comparison to employees in public organiza-
tions (M ⫽ 2.90, SD ⫽ 1.87) (t493 ⫽ ⫺4.50,
Psychological Empowerment

Org. size (no. of employees)

p ⬍ .001).
Children under 18 years

In both samples, job tenure was positively

Quantitative demands

Job tenure (in years)

Emotional demands

correlated with mental demands (r ⫽ .24, p ⬍

Variable
Mental demands

.01 in sample 1; r ⫽ .25, p ⬍ .01 in sample 2)

Managerial role

and with psychological empowerment (r ⫽ .19,

Org. type

p ⬍ .01 in sample 1; r ⫽ .29, p ⬍ .01 in sample

Burnout
Gender

2), and negatively correlated with burnout (r ⫽

Table 2

Age

⫺0.11, p ⬍ .05 in sample 1; r ⫽ ⫺0.10, p ⬍ .05

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

in sample 2). Thus, higher tenure is associated

ⴱ
 102 LIVNE AND RASHKOVITS

Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed); gender: 1 ⫽ male, 2 ⫽ female; managerial role: 1 ⫽ yes, 2 ⫽ no;
with higher levels of mental demands and psy-

1.00
⫺.06
11 chological empowerment, and with lower levels
of burnout.

⫺.22ⴱⴱ
1.00

.05
10

Hypotheses Testing

Hypotheses 1(a,b,c) and 2(a,b,c) were exam-

⫺.14ⴱⴱ
1.00

⫺.08
.01
ined using two multiple regression analyses.
9

These analyses allow for testing of the effect of

all three types of job demands while each one
.20ⴱⴱ
⫺.16ⴱⴱ
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

controls for the effect of the others. In the first

1.00
⫺.08

⫺.06
8
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

model, the three types of demands were re-

gressed on psychological empowerment and in
.30ⴱⴱ
⫺.18ⴱⴱ
.69ⴱⴱ
⫺.15ⴱⴱ
⫺.001
the second they were regressed on burnout. Em-
1.00
7

ployees’ gender, age, number of children under

18 years, managerial role, job tenure, organiza-
tion type, and organization size were used as
.12ⴱⴱ

⫺.09ⴱ
⫺.12ⴱ
1.00
⫺.03
.02

.01

control variables in both models. As shown in

6

Tables 4 and 5, in both samples the results fully

supported our hypotheses.
⫺.15ⴱⴱ
⫺.13ⴱⴱ

.20ⴱⴱ
⫺.10ⴱ

⫺.10ⴱ

As shown in Model 2 (Tables 4 and 5), con-

1.00

.06

⫺.02
5

sistent with hypothesis 1a, there was a signifi-

cant positive effect of mental demands on psy-
⫺.46ⴱⴱ

.33ⴱⴱ
.19ⴱⴱ
⫺.32ⴱⴱ
.29ⴱⴱ
⫺.15ⴱⴱ

chological empowerment in both samples (␤ ⫽

1.00

⫺.01

.02
4

0.53, p ⬍ .001 in sample 1; ␤ ⫽ 0.23, p ⬍ .001

in sample 2). Furthermore, in congruence with
Sample 2 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations Between Study Variables

hypothesis 1b, there was a significant nega-

.13ⴱⴱ
.24ⴱⴱ

⫺.18ⴱⴱ
.13ⴱⴱ
⫺.014
1.00

⫺.01
.07
⫺.03

.02
3

tive effect of quantitative demands on psy-

chological empowerment in both samples
(␤ ⫽ ⫺0.24, p ⬍ .001 in sample 1; ␤ ⫽
.45ⴱⴱ

.28ⴱⴱ
⫺.09ⴱ

⫺.10ⴱ

⫺0.18, p ⬍ .001 in sample 2). Finally, con-

1.00

⫺.04

.01
.07

.03
.09
.01
2

sistent with hypothesis 1c, there was no sig-

nificant effect of emotional demands on psy-
.13ⴱⴱ
.73ⴱⴱ
⫺.50ⴱⴱ

.30ⴱⴱ
.21ⴱⴱ
⫺.25ⴱⴱ
.25ⴱⴱ

chological empowerment in both samples

1.00
.08

⫺.01

.03
.04
1

(␤ ⫽ 0.01, N.S. in sample 1; ␤ ⫽ 0.04, N.S.

in sample 2).
ⴱⴱ

As shown in Model 4 (Tables 4 and 5), in

.62
.65
.63
.66
.94

11.24
1.12

6.50

1233.2
SD

Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed).

accordance with hypothesis 2a there was a sig-

nificant negative effect of mental demands on
burnout in both samples (␤ ⫽ ⫺.40, p ⬍ .001 in
3.35
2.70
2.65
3.94
3.24

33.08
.75

5.25

444.39

organization type: 1 ⫽ public, 2 ⫽ private.

sample 1; ␤ ⫽ ⫺.12, p ⬍ .01 in sample 2).

Mean

Furthermore, in congruence with hypothesis 2b,

there was a significant positive effect of quan-
Psychological Empowerment

Org. size (no. of employees)

titative demands on burnout in both samples

(␤ ⫽ 0.35, p ⬍ .001 in sample 1; ␤ ⫽ 0.28, p ⬍
Children under 18 years

.001 in sample 2). Finally, in congruence with

Quantitative demands

Job tenure (in years)

Emotional demands

hypothesis 2c, there was a significant positive

Variable
Mental demands

Managerial role

effect of emotional demands on burnout in both

samples (␤ ⫽ 0.18, p ⬍ .001 in sample 1; ␤ ⫽
Org. type

0.37, p ⬍ .001 in sample 2).

Burnout
Gender

Hypothesis 3 regarding the role of psycho-

Table 3

Age

logical empowerment as a mediating variable

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

between the mental demands of the job and

ⴱ
 PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT, BURNOUT, AND JOB DEMANDS 103

Table 4
Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for Job Demands Predicting
Psychological Empowerment and Burnout — Sample 1
Psychological
empowerment Burnout
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
Predictor Beta Beta Beta Beta
ⴱ
Gender .07 .03 ⫺.11 ⫺.08
Age .20ⴱⴱ .12ⴱⴱ ⫺.21ⴱⴱ ⫺.12
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Children under 18 years .12ⴱ .11ⴱ ⫺.07 ⫺.09ⴱ

⫺.23ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.19ⴱⴱⴱ
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Managerial role .04 .04

Role tenure ⫺.03 ⫺.09 .06 .10
Organization type ⫺.10 ⫺.07 .03 .05
Organization size ⫺.01 ⫺.01 ⫺.04 ⫺.03
Mental demands .53ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.40ⴱⴱⴱ
Quantitative demands ⫺.24ⴱⴱⴱ .35ⴱⴱⴱ
Emotional demands .01 .18ⴱⴱⴱ
R .41 .63 .26 .53
R2 .17 .40 .07 .28
Adjusted R2 .15 .39 .05 .26
R2 change .17ⴱⴱⴱ .23ⴱⴱⴱ .07ⴱⴱⴱ .21ⴱⴱⴱ
ⴱ ⴱⴱ ⴱⴱⴱ
p ⬍ .05 (2-tailed). p ⬍ .01 (2-tailed). p ⬍ .001 (2-tailed).

burnout was tested using Hayes’ Hayes (2013)
mediation analysis. Two mediation analyses
were conducted (one for each sample) using
SPSS PROCESS (Hayes, 2013), with the vari-
ables of quantitative and emotional demands as
covariates. This mediation analysis consists of
three steps: The first step is a regression analysis
for testing the effect of the independent variable
on the mediating variable. As seen in Table 6,
Models 1 and 3, in both samples there was a
significant effect of mental demands on psycho-
logical empowerment (p ⬍ .001). The second

Table 5
Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for Job Demands Predicting
Psychological Empowerment and Burnout — Sample 2
Psychological
empowerment Burnout
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
Predictor Beta Beta Beta Beta
ⴱ
Gender ⫺.00 ⫺.00 ⫺.122 ⫺.09ⴱ
Age .17ⴱⴱ .12ⴱ ⫺.151 ⫺.06
Children under 18 years .11ⴱ .11ⴱ ⫺.033 ⫺.03
Managerial role ⫺.31ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.28ⴱⴱⴱ .040 .09ⴱ
Role tenure .06 .06 .110 .03
Organization type ⫺.13ⴱⴱ ⫺.13ⴱⴱ .238ⴱⴱⴱ .24ⴱⴱⴱ
Organization size .03 .01 ⫺.022 ⫺.01
Mental demands .23ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.12ⴱⴱ
Quantitative demands ⫺.18ⴱⴱⴱ .28ⴱⴱⴱ
Emotional demands .04 .37ⴱⴱⴱ
R .47 .53 .31 .58
R2 .22 .28 .09 .34
Adjusted R2 .21 .26 .08
R2 change .22ⴱⴱⴱ .06ⴱⴱⴱ .09ⴱⴱⴱ .32ⴱⴱⴱ
ⴱ ⴱⴱ ⴱⴱⴱ
p ⬍ .05 (2-tailed). p ⬍ .01 (2-tailed). p ⬍ .001 (2-tailed).
 104 LIVNE AND RASHKOVITS

Table 6
Indirect Effects of Mental Demands on Burnout Mediated by
Psychological Empowerment
Sample 1 Sample 2
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
Psychological Psychological
Variable empowerment Burnout empowerment Burnout
ⴱⴱⴱ ⴱⴱⴱ ⴱⴱⴱ
Mental demands .50 ⫺.14 .36 ⫺.18ⴱⴱ
Psychological empowerment ⫺.38ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.64ⴱⴱⴱ
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Quantitative demands ⫺.20ⴱⴱⴱ .20ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.20ⴱⴱⴱ .27ⴱⴱⴱ

.003ⴱⴱⴱ .13ⴱⴱⴱ .10ⴱⴱⴱ .38ⴱⴱⴱ
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Emotional demands
ⴱⴱ ⴱⴱⴱ
p ⬍ .01. p ⬍ .001.

step is a regression analysis in which the medi-
ating variable is regressed on the dependent
variable. As seen in Table 6, in both samples
there was a significant effect of psychological
empowerment on burnout (Models 2 and 4, p ⬍
.001). In the final step, the indirect effect is
tested. In both samples, mental demands had a
significant negative indirect effect on burnout,
mediated by psychological empowerment (ab ⫽
⫺.19, Boot SE ⫽ .02, CI 95% [⫺.25, ⫺.15] in
sample 1; ab ⫽ ⫺023, Boot SE ⫽ .04, CI 95%
[⫺.32, ⫺.16] in sample 2). Thus, hypothesis 3
was supported.
Mediation analyses (Hayes, 2013) were also
conducted for testing hypothesis 4(a,b) regard-
ing the indirect effect of tenure on psychologi-
cal empowerment as well as on burnout via the
mediating variable of mental demands. Four
mediation analyses were conducted (two for
each sample) using SPSS PROCESS (Hayes,
2013), with the variables of quantitative and
emotional demands as covariates. As seen in
Table 7 (Models 1 and 4), in both samples there
was a significant effect of tenure on mental
demands (p ⬍ .001). In the second step of the
analysis, there was a significant effect of mental
demands on psychological empowerment (see
Table 7, Models 2 and 5, p ⬍ .001), as well as
on burnout (Models 3 and 6, p ⬍ .001). In the
final step, in both samples, tenure had a signif-
icant negative indirect effect on burnout, medi-
ated by mental demands (ab ⫽ ⫺.01, Boot
SE ⫽ .002, CI 95% [⫺.02, ⫺.007] in sample 1;
ab ⫽ 0.005, Boot SE ⫽ .002, CI 95% [⫺.01,
⫺.002] in sample 2), and tenure had a signifi-
cant positive indirect effect on psychological
empowerment, mediated by mental demands
(ab ⫽ .02, Boot SE ⫽ .002, CI 95% [0.01, 0.02]
in sample 1; ab ⫽ 0.004, Boot SE ⫽ .001, CI
95% [0.002, 0.007] in sample 2). Thus, hypoth-
esis 4(a,b) was supported.
Discussion
In today’s extremely demanding work envi-
ronment, where new types of demands become
more widespread and dominant (Cooper et al.,
2001; Demerouti et al., 2001; Kubicek et al.,

Table 7
Indirect Effects of Job Tenure on Psychological Empowerment and Burnout Mediated by Mental Demands
Sample 1 Sample 2
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6
Mental Psychological Mental Psychological
Variable demands empowerment Burnout demands empowerment Burnout
ⴱⴱⴱ ⴱⴱ ⴱⴱⴱ
Tenure .03 .01 ⫺.01 .01 .02 ⫺.01ⴱ
Mental demands .50ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.34ⴱⴱⴱ .31ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.39ⴱⴱⴱ
Quantitative demands .27ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.20ⴱⴱⴱ .28ⴱⴱⴱ .21ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.18ⴱⴱ .39ⴱⴱⴱ
Emotional demands .15ⴱⴱⴱ .01 .13ⴱⴱⴱ .25ⴱⴱⴱ .08 .33ⴱⴱⴱ
ⴱ ⴱⴱ ⴱⴱⴱ
p ⬍ .05. p ⬍ .01. p ⬍ .001.
 PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT, BURNOUT, AND JOB DEMANDS
2013), identifying unique relationship patterns
between different types of job demands and
employee outcomes becomes critical. Accord-
ingly, this study advances the understanding of
the associations between three types of job de-
mands and employee outcomes. First, the re-
sults support the three-factor model of mental,
quantitative, and emotional job demands
(Peeters et al., 2005). Second, they show that
job demands are both positively and negatively
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
related to employees’ well-being, depending on
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
their type. The study’s main contribution is in
pointing to the positive association of mental
demands with psychological empowerment and
reduced burnout, as opposed to the other two
types of demands.
Specifically, in accordance with our hypoth-
eses, we found that each type of demands had
its unique pattern of relationship with the two
psychological states. First, mental demands
were positively related to psychological em-
powerment and negatively related to burnout.
Second, quantitative demands demonstrated an
opposite pattern, that is, they were negatively
related to psychological empowerment and pos-
itively related to burnout. Finally, emotional
demands were positively related to burnout but
not related to psychological empowerment. In
addition, psychological empowerment mediated
the effect of mental demands on burnout. These
results were replicated with two samples; each
one was of considerable size and variety.
These results are in congruence with theories
that point to the internally motivating quality of
cognitive stimulation or mental demands
(Hackman & Oldham, 1976; Liden et al., 2000)
and to their ability to promote learning and
growth (Frese & Zapf, 1994; Schaufeli et al.,
2009). These unique features of mental de-
mands are demonstrated when they are isolated
from other types of job demands. The results are
also consistent with those of a recent study
(Kubicek et al., 2013) that found that demands
for accelerating the pace of life, which are quan-
titative in nature, were positively related to
burnout and negatively related to engagement.
However, in that study, the opposite pattern was
found for the demands to update one’s profes-
sional knowledge, these demands being cogni-
tive in nature.
The main purpose of the present study was to
explore the unique relationship pattern of each
category of job demand with burnout and psy-
105
chological empowerment. In addition to dem-
onstrating the hypothesized direct relationships
between job demands and employees’ out-
comes, psychological empowerment was found
to mediate the mental demands – burnout link.
This finding may point to a possible mechanism
underlying the favorable consequences of men-
tal demands; as this type of demand provides
cognitive stimulation, interest, and learning op-
portunities, it may produce a sense of meaning
and competence necessary for psychological
empowerment to emerge. The value attributed
to work goals and the worker’s self-efficacy
may in turn reduce burnout symptoms of emo-
tional exhaustion as well as feelings of cynicism
and detachment and reduced personal accom-
plishments, respectively. Future research is
needed to further explore the process by which
mental and other job demands influence em-
ployee’s well-being.
Furthermore, the present findings contribute
to the illumination of previous unexplained re-
search results. For example, Van den Broeck,
De Cuyper, De Witte, and Vansteenkiste (2010)
found that the effect of challenge stressors did
not demonstrate the expected positive associa-
tion with the exhaustion component of burnout.
Consequently, the authors called for further in-
vestigation of the relationship between job chal-
lenges and burnout. It should be noted that the
measure of challenge stressors used in that
study included mainly items assessing mental
demands and some assessing quantitative de-
mands. Therefore, it seems that this result was
mostly affected by mental demands that inhibit
exhaustion and burnout.
An additional finding concerns the indirect
effect of job tenure on both psychological em-
powerment and burnout, mediated by the level
of mental demands in the job. The positive
relationship between tenure and mental de-
mands in both samples raises initial support for
the possibility that as employees gain tenure
their jobs are characterized with higher levels of
mental demands. This may be due to promotion
to higher positions that involve more mentally
demanding tasks, as supported by the significant
relationship between tenure and managerial role
that was found in both samples. Mental de-
mands, in turn, contribute to higher levels of
psychological empowerment and to lower lev-
els of burnout, consistent with the results of our
hypotheses tests. Prior research found positive
 106 LIVNE AND RASHKOVITS
relationships between tenure and psychological
empowerment (e.g., Dickson & Lorenz, 2009;
Kruja et al., 2016), usually explained by en-
hanced feelings of competence due to increased
experience. However, they may also be attrib-
uted to greater mental demands, as more ten-
ured employees may attain higher organiza-
tional rank. Several studies also reported a
negative relationship between tenure and burn-
out (e.g., Attafaet al., 2011; Karatepe &
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Aleshinloye, 2009; Karatepe & Uludag, 2007),
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
meaning that employees with longer tenure re-
port less burnout. Although this relationship
was explained in terms of the capabilities de-
veloped by employees with longer tenure to
successfully cope with burnout in their organi-
zation, an alternative explanation, based on the
present study’s results, may concern the in-
creased mental demands associated with longer
tenure. Hence, these findings call for further
investigation of the relationship between job
tenure and mental demands.
Practical Implications
In today’s increasingly demanding work en-
vironment it is necessary to consider the conse-
quences of different job demands for employ-
ees’ psychological states, and to take them into
account when designing jobs. Our findings have
important implications for job designing, imply-
ing that the mental demands of a job are desir-
able and recommended, as opposed to the quan-
titative and emotional demands, which should
be placed with caution and sustained at a mod-
erate level.
Second, because the three types of demands
are correlated, but on the other hand hold dif-
ferent relationship patterns with employees’
outcomes, it seems vital to assess separately the
effects of each type of demands while control-
ling the effects of the other types when inves-
tigating their consequences at work.
Study Limitations and Future Research
This study has some limitations. First, its
correlational cross-sectional design doesn’t al-
low causality inference. Thus, in future studies
a longitudinal design allowing for causality in-
ferences is recommended. Second, in the pres-
ent study we focused on employees’ outcomes
of psychological states. However, future re-
search may investigate the unique relationships
between each type of job demand and behav-
ioral outcome, such as performance and ex-
trarole behaviors. Future research could also
test the mediating role of psychological states
(e.g., employee burnout and psychological em-
powerment) in the effects of different demands
on employee behaviors, such as job perfor-
mance, engagement, and citizenship behaviors
directed toward the organization (OCB-O) or
toward individuals in the organization (OCB-I;
Williams & Anderson, 1991). Additionally, fu-
ture research may expand the scope of the pres-
ent study to include job related resources (e.g.,
social support from peers and supervisors) and
stressors (e.g., role ambiguity and role conflict).
References
Ahearne, M., Mathieu, J., & Rapp, A. (2005). To
empower or not to empower your sales force? An
empirical examination of the influence of leader-
ship empowerment behavior on customer satisfac-
tion and performance. Journal of Applied Psychol-
ogy, 90, 945–955. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-
9010.90.5.945
Attafar, A., Asl, N. S., & Shahin, A. (2011). Effects
of demographic and personal factors on job burn-
out: An empirical study in Iran. International
Journal of Management, 28, 275–286.
Avolio, B. J., Zhu, W., Koh, W., & Bhatia, P. (2004).
Transformational leadership and organizational
commitment: Mediating role of psychological em-
powerment and moderating role of structural dis-
tance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25,
951–968. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.283
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job
demands–resources model: State of the art. Jour-
nal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309 –328.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115
Carlson, D., Ferguson, M., Hunter, E., & Whitten, D.
(2012). Abusive supervision and work–family
conflict: The path through emotional labor and
burnout. The Leadership Quarterly, 23, 849 – 859.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.05.003
Cooper, L. C., Dewe, P. J., & O’Driscoll, M. P.
(2001). Organizational stress: A review and cri-
tique of theory, research and applications. Thou-
sand Oaks, CA: Sage.
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. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499
Dickson, K. E., & Lorenz, A. (2009). Psychological
empowerment and job satisfaction of temporary
and part-time nonstandard workers: A preliminary
 PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT, BURNOUT, AND JOB DEMANDS
investigation. Journal of Behavioral and Applied
Management, 10, 166 –191.
Frese, M., & Zapf, D. (1994). Action as the core of
work psychology: A German approach. In H. C.
Triandis, M. D. Dunnette, & L. M. Hough (Eds.),
Handbook of industrial and organizational psy-
chology (2nd ed., Vol. 4, pp. 271–340). Palo Alto,
CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Gardner, T. M., Wright, P. M., & Moynihan, L. M.
(2011). The impact of motivation, empowerment,
and skill-enhancing practices on aggregate volun-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
tary turnover: The mediating effect of collective
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
affective commitment. Personnel Psychology, 64,
315–350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570
.2011.01212.x
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation
through design of work: Test of a theory. Organi-
zational Behavior and Human Performance, 16,
250 –279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-
5073(76)90016-7
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, mod-
eration, and conditional process analysis: A re-
gression-based approach. New York, NY: Guil-
ford Press.
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources. A
new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American
Psychologist, 44, 513–524. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513
Iverson, R. D., Olekalns, M., & Erwin, P. J. (1998).
Affectivity, organizational stressors, and absentee-
ism: A causal model of burnout and its conse-
quences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52,
1–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1996.1556
Karasek, R., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work:
Stress, productivity and the reconstruction of
working life. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Karatepe, O. M., & Aleshinloye, K. D. (2009). Emo-
tional dissonance and emotional exhaustion among
hotel employees in Nigeria. International Journal
of Hospitality Management, 28, 349 –358. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.12.002
Karatepe, O. M., & Uludag, O. (2007). Conflict,
exhaustion, and motivation: A study of frontline
employees in Northern Cyprus hotels. Interna-
tional Journal of Hospitality Management, 26,
645– 665. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2006.05
.006
Kraimer, M. L., Seibert, S. E., & Liden, R. C. (1999).
Psychological empowerment as a multidimen-
sional construct: A test of construct validity. Edu-
cational and Psychological Measurement, 59,
127–142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164
499591009
Kruja, D., Ha, H., Drishti, E., & Oelfke, T. (2016).
Empowerment in the hospitality industry in the
United States. Journal of Hospitality Marketing &
Management, 25, 25– 48. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1080/19368623.2015.976696
107
Kubicek, B., Korunka, C., & Ulferts, H. (2013).
Acceleration in the care of older adults: New de-
mands as predictors of employee burnout and en-
gagement. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69,
1525–1538. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jan.12011
Lance, C. L., Dawson, B., Birkelbach, D., & Hoff-
man, B. (2010). Method effects, measurement er-
ror, and substantive conclusions. Organizational
Research Methods, 13, 435– 455. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1177/1094428109352528
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, ap-
praisal and coping. New York, NY: Springer.
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2004). Areas of
worklife: A structured approach to organizational
predictors of job burnout. In P. L. Perrewe & D. C.
Ganster (Eds.), Research in occupational stress
and well-being (pp. 91–134). Oxford, England:
Elsevier.
Leiter, M. P., & Stright, N. (2009). The social context
of work life: Implications for burnout and work
engagement. In C. L. Cooper, J. C. Quick, & M. J.
Schabracq (Eds.), International handbook of work
and health psychology (3rd ed., pp. 25– 47). Chich-
ester, England: Wiley. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/
9780470682357.ch3
Lepine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & Lepine, M. A.
(2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge stres-
sor – hindrance stressor framework: An explana-
tion for inconsistent relationships among stressors
and performance. Academy of Management Jour-
nal, 48, 764 –775. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMJ
.2005.18803921
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2000).
An examination of the mediating role of psycho-
logical empowerment on the relations between the
job, interpersonal relationships, and work out-
comes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 407–
409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.3
.407
Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting
for common method variance in cross-sectional
research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology,
86, 114 –121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010
.86.1.114
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P.
(2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychol-
ogy, 52, 397– 422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/
annurev.psych.52.1.397
Peeters, M. C. W., Montgomery, A. J., Bakker, A. B.,
& Schaufeli, W. B. (2005). Balancing work and
home: How job and home demands are related to
burnout. International Journal of Stress Manage-
ment, 12, 43– 61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1072-
5245.12.1.43
Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., & LePine, M. A.
(2007). Differential challenge stressor – hindrance
stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover
intentions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior: A
 108 LIVNE AND RASHKOVITS
meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92,
438 – 454. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92
.2.438
Pomaki, G., Maes, S., & ter Doest, L. (2004).
Work conditions and employees’ self-set goals:
Goal processes enhance prediction of psycho-
logical distress and well-being. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 685– 694. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167204263970
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job de-
mands, job resources, and their relationship with
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293–315.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.248
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Van Rhenen, W.
(2009). How changes in job demands and re-
sources predict burnout, work engagement, and
sickness absenteeism. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 30, 893–917. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/
job.595
Seibert, S. E., Wang, G., & Courtright, S. H. (2011).
Antecedents and consequences of psychological
and team empowerment in organizations: A meta-
analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology,
96, 981–1003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0022676
Sliter, M., Jex, S., Wolford, K., & McInnerney, J.
(2010). How rude! Emotional labor as a mediator
between customer incivility and employee out-
comes. Journal of Occupational Health Psychol-
ogy, 15, 468 – 481. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
a0020723
Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment
in the work place: Dimensions, measurement and
validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38,
1442–1465. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256865
Spreitzer, G. M. (2008). Taking stock: A review of
more than twenty years of research on empower-
ment at work. In J. Barling & C. L. Cooper (Eds.),
Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 54 –72).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10
.4135/9781849200448.n4
Swider, B. W., & Zimmerman, R. D. (2010). Born to
burnout: A meta-analytic path model of personal-
ity, job burnout, and work outcomes. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 76, 487–506. http://dx.doi
.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.01.003
Taris, T. W. (2006). Is there a relationship between
burnout and objective performance? A critical re-
view of 16 studies. Work & Stress, 20, 316 –334.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02678370601065893
Van den Broeck, A., De Cuyper, N., De Witte, H., &
Vansteenkiste, M. (2010). Not all job demands are
equal: Differentiating job hindrances and job chal-
lenges in the job demands–resources model. Euro-
pean Journal of Work and Organizational Psy-
chology, 19, 735–759. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
13594320903223839
Van Veldhoven, M., & Meijman, T. (1994). Het
meten van psychosociale arbeidsbelasting met een
vragenlijst: De Vragenlijst Beleving en Beoordel-
ing van de Arbeid (VBBA) [Measurement of psy-
chosocial job demands with a questionnaire: The
questionnaire experience and evaluation of work
(VBBA)]. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: NIA.
Van Yperen, N. W., & Janssen, O. (2002). Fatigued
and dissatisfied or fatigued but satisfied? Goal ori-
entations and responses to high job demands.
Academy of Management Journal, 45, 1161–1171.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3069431
Wallach, V. A., & Mueller, C. W. (2006). Job char-
acteristics and organizational predictors of psycho-
logical empowerment among paraprofessionals
within human service organizations: An explor-
atory study. Administration in Social Work, 30,
95–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J147v30n01_06
Wielenga-Meijer, E. G., Taris, T. W., Kompier,
M. A., & Wigboldus, D. H. (2010). From task
characteristics to learning: A systematic review.
Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 51, 363–375.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2009
.00768.x
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satis-
faction and organizational commitment as predic-
tors of organizational citizenship and in-role be-
haviors. Journal of Management, 17, 601– 617.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700305
Received January 7, 2016
Revision received September 15, 2016
Accepted October 8, 2016 䡲