849667

research-article2019
JHTXXX10.1177/1096348019849667Journal Of Hospitality & Tourism ResearchMa et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion

From customer-related
social stressors to emotional
exhaustion: An Application Of The
Demands–Control Model

Zihui Ma
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Hyun Jeong Kim
Washington State University
Kang Hyun Shin
Ajou University

This study examines emotional intelligence (EI) as an additional moderator in

the interactive effect of customer-related social stressors (CSS) (demands) and job
autonomy (control) on emotional exhaustion by constructing a three-way interaction
(EI × CSS × Autonomy) for the regression model of emotional exhaustion. Employees
from hotels and restaurants in one metropolitan city in the United States participated
in this study. The interactive effect of CSS and autonomy on exhaustion is shown among
employees low in EI rather than high. Low EI employees experience greater exhaustion
when they perceive low autonomy (stress exacerbating effect). When CSS is high, job
autonomy is low, and EI is low, employees experience the highest level of emotional
exhaustion. The findings support the proposition that individual characteristics, such
as EI, add significant explanatory power to the job demands–control model (JDC) to
understand occupational stress. Managerial and theoretical implications are provided
based on the results.

Keywords: customer-related social stressors; job autonomy; emotional

intelligence; emotional exhaustion; job demands–control model

Hospitality companies survive and succeed by continuously providing supe-

rior services. However, high employee turnover challenges this goal. In 2016,
the restaurant and accommodation sector had a turnover rate of more than 70%
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2017; National Restaurant Association, 2017).
While hoteliers spend as much as 33% of revenue on labor costs (Deloitte,
2010), staff turnover could cost $5,964 on average per employee because of

Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, Vol. 43, No. 7, September 2019, 1068­–1091
DOI: 10.1177/1096348019849667
© The Author(s) 2019

1068
 Ma et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion 1069

productivity loss, recruiting, and orientation and training (Tracey & Hinkin,
2006). Thus, hospitality researchers have been keen to identify the underlying
causes of high turnover and related poor service performance among service
providers.
One common antecedent that has been explored to explain both high turnover
and low service performance is emotional exhaustion (EE; Maslach & Jackson,
1981). Among many forms of stressors that could result in emotionally depleted
employees (e.g., organizational climate, work overload, and work–family con-
flict) (Karatepe, 2013; O’Neill & Xiao, 2010), social stressors from negative
encounters with customers have been noted as a key stressor reflecting an inevi-
table phenomenon in the customer service setting (Hu, Hu, & King, 2017; Huang
& Miao, 2016). Customer-related social stressors (CSS) are known to negatively
affect service providers’ short- and long-term well-being (Dudenhöffer &
Dormann, 2013) and service recovery performance (Kim, Paek, Choi, & Lee,
2012).
Hospitality researchers have investigated how CSS predicts EE. Several
dimensions of CSS can directly increase EE (Choi, Kim, Lee, & Lee, 2012) and
the chronic impact of CSS on EE can be mediated through acute negative emo-
tion, such as anger (Weber, Bradley, & Sparks, 2017). Many approaches to less-
ening CSS-induced EE were identified from the individual level, incorporating
self-efficacy/positive affectivity (Karatepe, 2015), intrinsic motivation (Karatepe
& Aleshinloye, 2009), and customer orientation (Yoo, Kim, & Lee, 2015), to the
organizational level, including perceived organizational support (Karatepe,
2011) and supervisory support/training/empowerment/rewards (Babakus, Yavas,
& Karatepe, 2008).
However, these studies have focused on direct effects on EE without consid-
ering the interactive effect. More scholarly attention needs to be paid to integrate
both individual and organizational approaches, and their interactions to alleviate
EE, because individuals, as part of the organization, are heavily affected by
company action. In hospitality literature, Chiang, Birtch, and Kwan (2010) have
shown the possibility of interactive effects using two job-related moderators
(i.e., three-way interactions) on job stress, but no study has yet been conducted
to examine potential interactions between individual and job/organizational
variables to attenuate job stress.
To fill the research gap explained above, this study explores the mechanism of
how to attenuate the influence of CSS on EE under the framework of the job
demands–control (JD-C) model (Karasek, 1979; Karasek & Theorell, 1990). More
specifically, this study aims to shed light on how to effectively manage CSS-
induced EE by enabling employees to exercise autonomy at work (organizational
level) and by activating employees’ ability to handle emotions on site (individual
level) in an appropriate manner. Employees’ emotional intelligence (EI) is a sig-
nificant predictor of service performance (Prentice & King, 2011). Job autonomy
plays a considerable role in employees’ organizational commitment, particularly
1070   JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH

for quality-focused organizations, such as service firms (Park & Searcy, 2012);
furthermore, contact employees’ service innovative behavior is commensurate to
job autonomy (Dhar, 2016). The JD-C model will serve to articulate the interac-
tions between autonomy and employees’ EI and identify the conditions under
which a phenomenon (EE) is more or less likely to occur. The findings of this
study will contribute to the hospitality stress-related literature and assist practitio-
ners with a way to combat contact employees’ exhaustion to ultimately enhance
service performance.

Literature Review And Hypotheses Development

Job Demands–Control Model

The JD-C model was first introduced by Karasek (1979). Job demands per-
tain to the aspect of the job requiring employees to make sustained physical and/
or mental efforts, and job control refers to decision latitude, often conceived as
discretion, autonomy, or self-determination. Karasek (1979) foresaw the interac-
tion between job demands and job control in predicting job-related outcomes
and conceptualized the following four scenarios: (1) high demands–high control
(active job), (2) low demands–low control (passive job), (3) high demands–low
control (high-strain job), and (4) low demands–high control (low-strain job).
Among these four, two scenarios have received considerable, scholarly atten-
tion—active jobs (desirable) and high-strain jobs (undesirable). Active jobs are
in harmony with a stress-buffering hypothesis: High job control has a stress-
alleviating effect on job strain when job demands are high. On the other hand,
the most adverse situation occurs when job demands are high and job control is
low (Karasek & Theorell, 1990). These high-strain jobs suggest a stress-exacer-
bating hypothesis.
As studies on job stress advanced from health care professionals or teachers
to workers in various professions, scholars urged that the JD-C model should
incorporate the measures of diversified job demands to represent different occu-
pational groups (de Jonge, Dollard, Dormann, Le Blanc, & Houtman, 2000). In
this study, we selected customer-derived social stressors as critical job demands,
given that the participants of this study are hotel and restaurant employees fac-
ing an excessive number of customer contacts around the clock (Kim, 2008).
Hospitality service providers’ exhaustion triggered by frequent guest contacts
has been well documented (Min, Kim, & Lee, 2015).
In addition to a limited choice of occupations by JD-C scholars, the problem-
atic area in the JD-C model is the inconsistent interaction between job control
and job demands, which has been emphasized in several main reviews of the
JD-C model (Doef & Maes, 1999; Hausser, Mojzisch, Niesel, & Schulz-Hardt,
2010). Explanations for the failure of the moderating hypothesis have been
offered, including the mismatch of measures for job demand and job control and
the absence of a third variable (second moderator). For the latter issue, propo-
nents of the JD-C theory suggest job characteristics (Chiang et al., 2010) or
 Ma et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion 1071

individual characteristics (Fernet, Guay, & Senécal, 2004) as a feasible third

variable.

Customer-Related Social Stressors and Emotional Exhaustion

CSS is defined as job stressors that service providers experience during social
interactions with customers at work (Dormann & Zapf, 2004). During day-to-
day social interactions with customers, hospitality service providers do “people-
work” (Kim, 2008). “People-work” requires emotional work, also known as
emotional labor. Emotional labor signifies an employee’s emotional expression
and regulation per display rules, prescribed by the organization, to achieve orga-
nizational goals (Ashforth, 1993; Grandey, 2000; Hochschild, 1983). There are
two primary emotional regulation strategies: (1) surface acting (faking facial
signs of emotion) and (2) deep acting (reappraising events and modifying inner
feelings). While display rules could be resources as a guideline for employees,
emotional labor demanded by display rules is viewed as a “double-edged sword”
that induces strain, emotional dissonance, and burnout (Kim, 2008).
Hospitality researchers have noted hospitality service providers’ suffering
and exhaustion from emotional work, originating from CSS (Choi et al., 2012;
Karatepe, Yorganci, & Haktanir, 2009). CSS has four subfacets: (1) dispropor-
tionate customer expectations, (2) customer verbal aggression, (3) disliked cus-
tomers, and (4) ambiguous customer expectations (Dormann & Zapf, 2004).
Karatepe et al. (2009) and Kim, Shin, and Swanger (2009) reported a significant,
positive relationship between customers’ verbal aggression and EE using a sam-
ple of lodging employees in Northern Cyprus and a sample of Subway restaurant
employees in the United States. Choi et al. (2012) found that three components
of CSS (ambiguous customer expectations, disliked customers, and customer
verbal aggression) are positively related to exhaustion among frontline person-
nel in travel agencies, tourist hotels, and tourist restaurants in South Korea.
Given the previous findings, it seems reasonable to assume CSS as the anteced-
ent of EE in the hospitality work context:

Hypothesis 10: There will be no effect of CSS on EE.

Hypothesis 1a: There will be a main effect of CSS on EE. CSS will be positively
associated with EE.

Job Autonomy and EE and the Moderating Role of Autonomy in the

Relationship Between CSS and Exhaustion

Hackman and Oldham (1975) define job autonomy as the degree to which the
job provides employees with substantial independence and decision latitude in
their work pace and phases. The occupational stress literature demonstrates that
job autonomy is crucial for employee well-being because of the opportunities
that employees may have to cope with stressful situations (Jenkins, 1991). For
1072   JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH

example, in the service job context, managers may not always be available, and
customers are impatient with organizational hierarchy or being referred to other
departments or units (Hart, Heskett, & Sasser, 1990). From the service provid-
ers’ viewpoint, satisfying customers sooner rather than later can lessen their own
stress. In other words, job autonomy enables employees to solve problems in a
timely fashion. The hospitality literature has yielded support for the positive link
between autonomy and employees’ better response to work role (Ross, 1997)
and the negative link between autonomy and employees’ perception of EE (Kim,
2008). Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed for the relationship
between job autonomy and EE.

Hypothesis 20: There will be no effect of job autonomy on emotional exhaustion.

Hypothesis 2a: There will be a main effect of job autonomy on emotional exhaustion.
Job autonomy will be negatively associated with emotional exhaustion.

At the same time, abiding by the core principle of the JD-C model, this study
postulates that employees’ use of job autonomy (control) may potentially miti-
gate the magnitude of the relationship between CSS (demands) and EE (job
strain) because ample decision latitude may help improve the quality of cus-
tomer service. Kim and Stoner (2008) surveyed social workers in California and
found that social workers with more job autonomy report lower levels of burn-
out. Bakker, Demerouti, and Euwema (2005) provided evidence that autonomy
can effectively diminish the unfavorable influences of work overload and emo-
tional demands on burnout through interactive effects.
As hospitality jobs involve role stress, work overload, and emotional
demands, dealing with customers’ complaints, impoliteness, and intimidation,
hospitality employees can benefit from the specific job control—job autonomy.
In other words, when service providers perceive a high level of job autonomy,
EE originating from CSS may be diminished. This is in line with the stress-
buffering hypothesis. The opposite relationship (stress-exacerbating hypothesis)
can be predicted with the presence of low job control. When hospitality employ-
ees perceive a low level of autonomy, EE resulting from CSS may be increased.
Given the empirical support for the JD-C-moderating hypothesis (Bourbonnais,
Comeau, & Vézina, 1999; Van Yperen & Hagedoorn, 2003) and the belief that
job autonomy and CSS are well-matched control and demand variables in the
high customer-contact work setting such as hotels and restaurants, this study
posits the following:

Hypothesis 30: There will be no two-way interactive effect of CSS and job autonomy
on emotional exhaustion.
Hypothesis 3a: There will be a two-way interactive effect of CSS and job autonomy
on emotional exhaustion. High job autonomy will be stress buffering, and low job
autonomy will be stress exacerbating in the relationship between CSS and emotional
 Ma et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion 1073

exhaustion. The highest level of exhaustion will occur when CSS is high and job
autonomy is low.

EI and Its Moderating Role in the Interactive Effect of CSS and

Autonomy on EE

The trait of EI is defined as a constellation of behavioral dispositions and

self-perceptions concerning one’s ability to recognize, process, and utilize emo-
tion-laden information (Petrides & Furnham, 2003). In a meta-analysis, Schutte,
Malouff, Thorsteinsson, Bhullar, and Rooke (2007) argue that the individual
characteristic of EI, which accounts for variability in emotional capabilities of
both intrapersonal (e.g., regulating one’s own emotion) and interpersonal (e.g.,
using others’ emotion) dimensions, may favorably affect one’s physical and psy-
chosomatic well-being. Other scholars reveal health-conscious behaviors by
people with high EI. Those high in EI tend to seek heath professionals’ assis-
tance and conform to their advice (Ciarrochi & Deane, 2001). People with high
EI are better equipped to resist peer pressure to drink alcohol and smoke (Austin,
Saklofske, & Egan, 2005; Trinidad & Johnson, 2002). Salovey, Bedell,
Detweiler, and Mayer (2000) suggest that EI functions as a coping mechanism
that may assist individuals in regulating themselves toward desired ends.
As mentioned earlier, the JD-C model has been controversial because of
mixed findings on the interaction between job demands and job control (de
Jonge, van Vegchel, Shimazu, Schaufeli, & Dormann, 2010; Doef & Maes,
1999; Hausser et al., 2010) and individual differences may offer the most feasi-
ble answer to the failure (Györkös, Becker, Massoudi, de Bruin, & Rossier,
2015; Parker & Sprigg, 1999). For example, Meier, Semmer, Elfering, and
Jacobshagen’s (2008) study shows the significance of individual characteristics
in the JD-C model. They found that for people with high levels of self-efficacy
or internal locus of control, job control diminished the effect of job stressors on
affective strain and musculoskeletal pain. Fernet et al. (2004) reported the three-
way interaction under the JD-C model after including an individual characteris-
tic—self-determination. Their results show that job control buffers the unhealthy
effect of job demands on EE only for employees with high levels of work self-
determination. In other words, certain individuals are susceptible to the use of
job control and, thus, enhance the traditional JD-C model with more refined,
theoretical accounts.
EI may influence the interaction effect between CSS and job autonomy on
exhaustion in a number of ways. First, a high level of EI predisposes individuals
to recognize emotion in a customer’s nonverbal expression, which allows ser-
vice employees to process CSS and capture the accurate emotions of customers
(Buck, 1984). Second, with high EI, service employees may take less effort to
develop knowledge about emotions to facilitate certain types of problem solving
(Erez & Isen, 2002). It is thus expected that high EI people would use a proper
emotion to react to customer emotions. Third, when employees are faced with a
1074   JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH

difficult customer, the increased ability to manage one’s own emotion should
promote a calm situation and, at the same time, they think and act in ways to use
job autonomy in a timely manner. As it can be imagined, reasonable actions
based on the service recovery protocol can hardly be executed when emotions
are out of control. Finally, the growth of emotional self-management enhances
the protective role of EI in stress in the workplace (Mikolajczak, Menil, &
Luminet, 2007).
Like people high in self-efficacy and internal locus of control, we expect high
EI individuals to have a potential to actively use job control such as job auton-
omy because of the role of EI as a coping mechanism (Salovey et al., 2000).
Several coping styles are possible to manage the potential stress and negative
consequences of emotional labor, driven by CSS, including emotion-focused
coping, avoidance coping, and problem-solving coping (Jung & Yoon, 2016;
Kim & Agrusa, 2011). In general, compared with emotion- or avoidance-ori-
ented coping, active and problem-focused coping produces desirable outcomes
in the workplace (Endler & Parker, 1994).
Kim and Agrusa (2011) found that EI is significantly related to active, task-
oriented coping in the hospitality workplace. High-EI individuals have the abil-
ity to relate to others thanks to their sensitivity to emotion-laden information
(Mikolajczak, Nelis, Hansenne, & Quoidbach, 2008). This sensitivity to others
is likely to motivate high-EI employees to be task-oriented, problem-solving
copers (Kim & Agrusa, 2011) by energetically using their job autonomy to
reduce others’ stress, which ultimately lowers their own stress. High job auton-
omy is, therefore, likely to serve as a buffer against CSS for high-EI hospitality
employees. What happens to high-EI individuals when they perceive low auton-
omy? Despite high-EI individuals’ inclination to use job autonomy, we do not
necessarily expect low autonomy to worsen high-EI employees’ exhaustion
because of the empirical findings on their resilience to burnout (Lee & Ok,
2012); in other words, the stress-exacerbating effect of low autonomy may not
take place under a high-EI condition.
If the nature of low EI is opposite of that of high EI, job autonomy may not be
actively sought by low-EI workers (less frequent use of autonomy). This implies
that the stress-buffering effect of autonomy may not be salient under a low-EI
condition. However, everyone strives to minimize stress at work. When low-EI
employees do feel that autonomy is needed while confronting demanding or chal-
lenging situations, the lack of (or low) autonomy may create far worse conse-
quences for low-EI employees than for high-EI workers. Low-EI employees are
found to be more susceptible to job stress than high-EI employees (Huang, Chan,
Lam, & Nan, 2010). The conservation of resources (COR) theory asserts that for
individuals with a low personal resource (low-EI person in this study), the lack of
other resources (job autonomy in this study) could worsen the stress level
(Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll & Shirom, 1993). In summary, this study predicts that
high EI is well suited to the stress-buffering hypothesis while low EI fits well into
 Ma et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion 1075

the stress-exacerbating hypothesis in the JD-C framework. These rationales lead

to the following three-way interaction hypotheses (Figure 1):

Hypothesis 40: There will be no three-way interactive effect of CSS, job autonomy,
and EI on emotional exhaustion.
Hypothesis 4a: There will be a three-way interactive effect of CSS, job autonomy, and
EI on emotional exhaustion.
Hypothesis 4(1)a: For employees with high EI (compared with low EI), high job
autonomy will be stress buffering in the relationship between CSS and emotional
exhaustion.
Hypothesis 4(2)a: For employees with low EI (compared with high EI), low job
autonomy will be stress exacerbating in the relationship between CSS and emotional
exhaustion. The highest level of exhaustion will occur when CSS is high, job auton-
omy is low, and EI is low.

Method

Procedure and Sample

Data were collected from employees working in four mid-to-upscale hotels

and three full-service restaurants located in one metropolitan city in the
United States. After gaining approval from the top manager of each establish-
ment (i.e., general manager or owner), employees and supervisors/managers
in the front of the house were invited to this research project: hotels (person-
nel from front desk, concierge, sales, and banquets) and restaurants (servers
and bartenders). Top managers, who approved data collection, are alumni or
recruiters who are familiar with the lead author’s hospitality program. Thus,
it is a convenient sampling method. Although the responsibility of each
department may differ, participating employees and supervisors in these
departments make extensive face-to-face interactions with customers, thereby
likely experiencing CSS.
On the cover letter of the survey, we emphasized the importance of this
study and guaranteed anonymity. Participants were allowed to take part in
this study voluntarily during their break or after a daily meeting of the unit.
Participants returned their surveys to the research assistant in an envelope.
Two research assistants visited their assigned properties twice. Data collec-
tion took about 2 weeks. Of 480 surveys, 191 surveys were collected (response
rate: 40%). After the removal of poorly answered questionnaires, 173 surveys
were used for data analyses. The majority of respondents (60.1%) were
females (n = 104) and 39.9% were males (n = 69). The respondents’ ages
ranged from 18 to 60 years. One-third of respondents (30.6%, n = 53) were
supervisors or managers, and the remaining (69.4%, n = 120) were nonsuper-
visors. The average work experience was 6.5 years for hotels and 2.9 years
for restaurants.
1076   JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH

Measures

The CSS scale, developed by Dormann and Zapf (2004), was used as an indi-
cator for job demands in this study: ambiguous customer expectations (4 items),
disproportionate customer expectations (8 items), verbal aggression (5 items),
and disliked customers (4 items). Job autonomy was assessed by the subscale of
Hackman and Oldham’s (1975) job diagnostic survey (3 items). EI was assessed
by Wong and Law’s (2002) EI scale: self-emotion appraisal (4 items), others’
emotion appraisal (4 items), uses of emotion (4 items), and regulation of emo-
tion (4 items). EE was measured with the subscale of Maslach Burnout Inventory
(9 items; Maslach & Jackson, 1981). All CSS items were rated on a five-point
Likert-type scale (1 = never, 5 = very often), and the rest of the constructs
including autonomy, EI, and EE were rated on a five-point Likert-type scale (1
= strongly agree, 5 = strongly disagree). For the purpose of descriptive analy-
ses, age, gender, and departments were inquired at the end of the survey. Age
was answered in years. Gender (male or female) and work areas (department
names) were listed and asked as categorical variables. Reliability and validity of
all scales are discussed in detail in the later, measurement model section.

Analysis And Results

Common Method Bias

Because data were collected from a single source (i.e., common rater), they
may be vulnerable to common method bias. First, Harman’s one-factor test was
performed to test common method bias (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, &
Podsakoff, 2003). The results of the analyses showed that the largest, extracted
component accounts for only 24.9% of total variance, indicating a minimal pos-
sibility of common method bias. Second, despite its popularity, Harman’s one-
factor test has been perceived as a weak, conceptually flawed statistical
procedure by several researchers (Chang, van Witteloostuijn, & Eden, 2010;
MacKenzie & Podsakoff, 2012). Given this criticism, the unmeasured latent
method factor approach (Min, Park, & Kim, 2016; Podsakoff et al., 2003), was
conducted. All paths (factor loading values) were compared between two mea-
surement models: (1) a model with a common method factor and (2) a model
without a common method factor. Because factor loading differences between
the two measurement models were trivial, ranging from −.096 to .009, the results
confirmed that the possibility of common method bias is indeed slim.

Measurement Model

Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted with Mplus 7 (Muthén &

Muthén, 2012) to examine the psychometric properties of the measurement
model. Prior to testing the measurement model, we averaged items in each sub-
dimension of CSS and EI and treated subdimensions as indicators of their
 Ma et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion 1077

respective higher order latent variables. The fit of the four-factor model appears
to be satisfactory except for the chi-square test: χ2 (161) = 269.010, p ≤ .001;
comparative fit index (CFI) = .923, Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) = .909, stan-
dardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = .06, root mean square error of
approximation (RMSEA) = .06. Note that the chi-square test is sensitive to the
sample size, frequently producing a significant result (Kline, 1998). Thus,
researchers consider the results of other fit indices.
As for reliabilities, coefficient H (Hancock & Mueller, 2001), a measure of
composite reliability displayed the evidence of construct reliability: .86 for CSS,
.90 for EE, .75 for EI, and .63 for job autonomy (Table 1). Although the reliabil-
ity value for autonomy is lower than other constructs, the modest level of .63 is
acceptable (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). All measurement items of the four
constructs loaded significantly on their respective constructs (p < .001) with the
standardized factor loading values ranging from .46 to .85 (Table 1). This dem-
onstrates a reasonable evidence of convergent validity of the measurement
model (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988).
Discriminant validity can be assessed by examining correlations among
latent variables. Correlations among latent variables ranged from −.21 to .45
(Table 2), implying that constructs are not highly correlated with one another
and therefore each construct is distinctive. To further examine discriminant
validity, average variance extracted (AVE) values (Table 2) were compared
with squared correlations between study constructs (Anderson & Gerbing,
1988; Fornell & Larcker, 1981). AVE values for the four study constructs (.36
≤ AVEs ≤ .60) were greater than squared interconstruct correlations (.0001
< r2s < .20), reassuring the distinctiveness of each latent variable in this
study.

Preliminary Analyses

We reviewed the mean ratings of four study constructs and zero-order corre-
lations among the four constructs (Table 2). The mean values of study constructs
are: for EI, 3.87; for CSS, 2.80; for job autonomy, 3.41; and for EE, 2.31. Given
that the highest possible rating is 5.0, respondents’ EI is moderately high. This
indicates that the hospitality industry attracts workers who are emotionally intel-
ligent. Respondents’ perceived CSS level is close to 3.0. This suggests that hos-
pitality employees do experience CSS. Despite the possible, frequent encounters
of CSS, the level of job autonomy (3.41) appears to be limited.
CSS is positively correlated with EE (r = .45, p < .01) as expected (H1a);
job autonomy is negatively correlated with EE (r = −.15, p = .07) as expected
(H2a). A few other noteworthy correlations are a negative association between
EI and EE (r = −.32, p < .01), a negative association between EI and CSS
(r = −.21, p < .01), and a positive association between EI and autonomy
(r = .45, p < .01).
1078   JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH

Table 1
Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Measurement Items

Standardized Coefficient
Items Factor Loadings H

Customer-related social stressors .86

1. Ambiguous customer expectations .85
2. Disproportionate customer expectations .76
3. Verbal aggression .73
4. Disliked customers .74
Job autonomy .63
1. M y job lets me be left on my own to do my .66
own work.
2. I am able to act independently of my .60
supervisor in performing my job function.
3. M y job provides me with the opportunity of .50
self-directed flexibility of work hours.
Emotional intelligence .75
1. Self-emotion appraisal .76
2. Others’ emotion appraisal .54
3. Use of emotion .46
4. Regulation of emotion .69
Emotional exhaustion .90
1. I feel frustrated by my job. .82
2. I feel emotionally drained from my work. .63
3. I feel used up at the end of the workday. .61
4. I feel tired when I get up in the morning and .62
have to face another day on the job.
5. W orking with people all day is really .64
stressful to me.
6. I feel burned out from my work. .82
7. I feel I am working too hard on my job. .77
8. W
 orking with people directly puts too much .67
stress on me.
9. I feel like I am at the end of my rope. .50

Note: Model fit indices: χ2 (161) = 269.010, p ≤ .001; CFI (comparative fit index) = .923,
TLI (Tucker–Lewis index) = .909, SRMR (standardized root mean square residual) = .06,
RMSEA (root mean square error of approximation) = .06.

Hierarchical Regression

We performed hierarchical regression analyses to test research hypotheses.

All interaction variables were mean-centered to reduce multicollinearity (Aiken
& West, 1991). Gender and age were used as control variables because Maslach
and Jackson’s (1981) seminal work showed the profound effect of gender and
age on experienced burnout among many sociodemographic characteristics. The
six steps of entering predictors, moderators, and interaction terms, and the
results of regression models are shown in Table 3. After controlling for gender
 Ma et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion 1079

Table 2
Means, Standard Deviations (SD), Average Variance Extracted (AVE), and
Correlations

Variables Mean SD AVE 1 2 3 4 5

1. Gender 0.52 0.50 —

2. Age 23.8 4.51 − −0.30**
3. CSS 2.80 0.74 0.60 −0.03 −0.12
4. Job autonomy 3.41 0.90 0.37 0.05 0.03 0.04
5. Emotional intelligence 3.87 0.53 0.40 0.01 0.08 −0.21** 0.19*
6. Emotional exhaustion 2.31 0.77 0.47 0.05 −0.08 0.45** −0.15† −0.32**

Note: n = 173; gender is coded 1 = female and 0 = male; CSS =customer-related social
stressors. All measures are rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale except for gender and age.
†p < .1. *p < .05. **p < .01.

Table 3
Results of Moderated Regression Analyses

Emotional Exhaustion

Variables Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6

Control variables
Gender 0.04 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.18 0.14
Age −0.02 −0.004 −0.005 −0.005 −0.007 −0.01
Job demand and job control
CSS 0.49** 0.50** 0.46** 0.47** 0.41**
Job autonomy −0.20** −0.20** −0.17** −0.17** −0.14*
Two-way interaction
CSS × Job autonomy −0.04 −0.02 −0.11 −0.16
Individual characteristic
Emotional intelligence −0.22* −0.17 −0.21†
Two-way interactions of emotional intelligence
CSS × Emotional 0.23 0.20
intelligence
Job autonomy × −0.19 −0.16
Emotional intelligence
Three-way interaction
CSS × Job autonomy × 0.34*
Emotional intelligence
F 0.96 10.24** 8.51** 8.04** 6.76** 6.65**
R 0.02 0.27 0.27 0.29 0.31 0.33
ΔR 0.25** 0.001 0.02* 0.02 0.02*

Note: CSS = customer-related social stressors.

†p< .1. *p < .05. **p < .01.
1080   JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH

Figure 1
Proposed Model

Note:
H1 and H2: direct effects.
H3: Two-way interaction (Customer-related social stressors × Job autonomy).
H4: Three-way interaction (Customer-related social stressors × Job autonomy ×
Emotional intelligence).

and age, CSS is positively associated with exhaustion (β = .49, p < .01),
whereas job autonomy is negatively associated with exhaustion (β = −.20, p<
.01; Model 2). These results reject null hypotheses H10 and H20, lending support
to alternative hypotheses (H1a and H2a). As for the interaction between CSS and
autonomy, the two-way interactive effect (CSS × Autonomy) on exhaustion is
not significant (β = −.04, n.s.; Model 3), leading to the rejection of alternative
hypothesis H3a.
The final hypothesis focuses on the moderating role of EI in the relationship
of the interactive effect of CSS and autonomy on exhaustion. The three-way
interactive effect (CSS × Autonomy × EI) on exhaustion is found to be signifi-
cant (β = .34, p < .05; Model 6). Thus, the null hypothesis H40 is rejected. To
understand the nature of the moderating relationship (alternative hypotheses
H4(1)a and H4(2)a), the pattern of the interaction (Figure 2) was plotted accord-
ing to the procedure recommended by Aiken and West (1991). In addition, sim-
ple slopes analyses (Jaccard, Wan, & Turrisi, 1990) and the slope differences test
(Dawson & Richter, 2006) were utilized to interpret the details of interaction
effects.
As for employees high in EI, simple slope tests show that the two significant
slopes are parallel between high job autonomy (Slope 1 = .54, p < .01) and low
job autonomy (Slope 2 = .51, p < . 01). This seems to reject the stress-buffering
effect of high autonomy on the relationship between CSS and exhaustion for
high-EI personnel (H4(1)a). The result of slope difference tests (Table 4) further
validates this speculation; when EI is high, the slope difference (Slopes 1 and 2)
 Ma et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion 1081

Figure 2
Three-Way Interaction Plots

Table 4
Results of Slope Difference Tests for the Three-Way Interaction

Pair of Slopes t

1 and 2 0.16
1 and 3 2.48*
1 and 4 −0.39
2 and 3 −1.78
2 and 4 −0.46
3 and 4 −2.27*

Note: 1 = high autonomy, high emotional intelligence; 2 = low autonomy, high emotional
intelligence; 3 = high autonomy, low emotional intelligence; 4 = low autonomy, low
emotional intelligence.
*p < .05. **p < .01.

is insignificant. Specifically, under a high-EI condition, when autonomy is high,

exhaustion scores get higher as CSS becomes higher: from 1.93 to 2.72 (Slope 1
= .54). A similar pattern is observed with low autonomy. Under a high-EI condi-
tion, when autonomy is low, exhaustion ratings become higher as CSS becomes
higher: from 2.35 to 3.09 (slope 2= .51). This indicates that for high-EI workers,
autonomy (job control) and CSS (job demands) predict exhaustion mostly in an
additive manner (main effects).
1082   JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH

For low EI, the interaction between CSS and autonomy is found to be signifi-
cant. Simple slope analyses reveal a significant, upward effect of CSS on EE
when low-EI employees perceive low job autonomy (Slope 4 = .63, p < .01)
compared with high job autonomy (Slope 3 = −.01, n.s.) (stress-exacerbating
hypothesis). Moreover, the highest level of exhaustion occurs when EI is low,
CSS is high, and job autonomy is low. All these results are supportive of alterna-
tive hypothesis H4(2)a. Congruent with the results of simple slope tests, slope
difference tests show that under a low EI condition, the two slopes (Slopes 3 and
4) are significantly different (p < . 05), implying that autonomy is indeed a
salient moderator in the relationship between CSS and exhaustion. More specifi-
cally, under a low-EI condition, when job autonomy is low, exhaustion resulting
from CSS becomes higher (from 2.35 to 3.25, Slope 4 = .63), while when job
autonomy is high, exhaustion triggered by CSS remains almost the same or goes
down slightly (from 2.71 to 2.69, Slope 3 = −.01). That is to say, CSS is posi-
tively related to exhaustion only when autonomy is low for those with low EI. In
summary, the first alternative hypothesis H4(1)a is rejected and the second alter-
native hypothesis H4(2)a is supported.
Although tests comparing Slopes 1 and 2, and Slopes 3 and 4 are central to
interpret H4(1)a and H4(2)a, respectively, the results of other slope difference
tests confirm and enhance our understanding of the prominence of autonomy for
low EI. For example, the significant slope difference between Slope 3 (low EI,
high autonomy) and Slope 1 (high EI, high autonomy) evidently demonstrates
that (as discussed before) thanks to high autonomy, the exhaustion level for a
low-EI person remains the same from low CSS to high CSS, but high autonomy
is not of much benefit to a high-EI person, as the exhaustion level increases
along with CSS.

Discussion

This study shows that high demands are associated with a high level of strain
(EE) employing specific job stressors, social interactions with customers. This is
in line with the result of prior research that has used service samples, such as
sales clerks in a shoe store (Dormann & Zapf, 2004) and employees in hotels
and restaurants (Choi et al., 2012). It is worth contemplating the score of CSS
(mean = 2.80) (Table 2); more close analyses show that around one third of
employees (31%, n = 53) rate CSS between 3 (sometimes) and 4 (often), and
about one tenth of employees (8%, n = 12) rate CSS greater than 4 (often to very
often). This statistic reflects the harsh reality of CSS that hospitality employees
frequently face.
In terms of the compatibility of job demands and control, we thought that
autonomy, the job control variable chosen for this study, would be a good match
with CSS, job demands. Nonetheless, the two-way interaction (CSS × Autonomy)
is insignificant. This result suggests that the JD-C theory, as noted by many
 Ma et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion 1083

previous scholars, may need to be expanded, and with the inclusion of the third
variable such as individual characteristics, the theory becomes more viable.
It is intriguing to see no stress-buffering effects of job autonomy for high EI
in the linkage between CSS and exhaustion. The outcome of no interaction
(buffering) effect may reflect the fact that the characteristic of EI is rather com-
plex (Zeidner, Matthews, & Roberts, 2004). It is possible that in CSS situations,
high-EI employees are able to comfort or relieve customers’ upsetting feelings
or anxiety even before exerting job autonomy. This rationale can be explained
by the theory of the COR (Hobfoll, 1989); the potential or actual loss of resources
leads to negative states or even exhaustion if no action is taken to protect
depleted resources (Hobfoll & Shirom, 1993). Individual characteristics are per-
sonal resources that affect the way in which individuals react to and help protect
themselves from stress; the COR theory suggests that those with fewer resources
suffer more when their resources are depleted. High-EI employees may have a
“reservoir” of emotional resources that they can draw on during problematic
interactions with customers and enable customers to feel and behave better.
Thus, those with high EI may be less stressed and may not consume as many of
their other resources, such as job autonomy.
The COR theory also suits the stress-exacerbating hypothesis under a low-EI
condition. Employees who are low in EI are likely to be in need of additional
resources to overcome CSS and maintain their job because they are short of
personal resources to maneuver stressful situations. Therefore, EE increases
more dramatically for low-EI individuals when autonomy (additional resource)
is scarce. Last, it should be noted that for high-EI individuals, despite no interac-
tive effects (CSS × Autonomy) on exhaustion, the main (direct) effect of auton-
omy on exhaustion is salient. This indicates that autonomy is an important job
resource for high-EI employees as well.

Theoretical Implications

The first contribution of this article lies in the JD-C literature. The JD-C
model has been widely used for decades as an important framework for occupa-
tional stress; however, it is apparent that there is room for further applications of
the JD-C framework as the variety of jobs continues to grow. For hospitality
services, intensive social interactions with customers are a distinguishable
stressor from other general physical or psychological stressors (e.g., work over-
load and time pressure). This study advances the depth of the JD-C literature by
addressing previously untapped demands, CSS in a specific occupational group
such as hospitality.
At the same time, this study enriches hospitality burnout literature given that
very few hospitality scholars have adopted the JD-C model. Building on the
direct relationship between CSS and EE that hospitality scholars have previ-
ously established, this study proposes possible moderating hypotheses (stress
buffering and stress exacerbating) to advance the theory, utilizing the JD-C
1084   JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH

framework. In addition, we constructed a three-way interaction with two mod-

erators to provide further insight into the ongoing debate regarding the solidity
of the JD-C model.
Next, EI continues to draw scholarly attention because of its impact on
employee performance and well-being (Joseph, Jin, Newman, & O’Boyle, 2015;
Laborde, Lautenbach, Allen, Herbert, & Achtzehn, 2014). The effect of EI on
work stress is fairly well documented (Lee & Ok, 2012), but little is known
about the interactive role of EI in work stress. This study illustrates an example
of how job/organizational characteristics and individual dispositions work
together to reduce job strain, utilizing CSS (strain), autonomy (job variable), and
EI (individual variable). In summary, this study enhances our understanding of
EI in the workplace and contributes to the EI literature.

Practical Implications

The findings of this study have managerial implications for work design and
organizational interventions to reduce job stress among hospitality frontline
employees. As indicated in the discussion section, stress occurs when dealing
with difficult customers. To reduce the negative effects of CSS on service pro-
viders, preventative strategies are recommended. First, hospitality companies
should realize that “customers are not always right,” which may be against the
traditional mentality of the service company. For example, a zero-tolerance pol-
icy toward customer abuse of frontline employees along with supervisors’
prompt intervention in such situations could be implemented. Such policies or
procedures are likely to send a powerful signal that companies genuinely care
about the well-being of their service employees.
Second, short breaks after stressful encounters and opportunities to briefly
express concerns about misbehaving customers to experienced coworkers or
supervisors can ease line employees’ EE before they return to high-quality ser-
vice. In other words, coworkers and supervisors should be trained in how to
support line employees, who have negative interactions with customers, by shar-
ing successful experiences and strategies in problematic situations. This way,
coworkers and supervisors become a helpful resource for stressed service
employees (Kim, Hur, Moon, & Jun, 2017).
Third, although hiring applicants with high EI is ideal for hospitality compa-
nies, in reality, hospitality firms may not always secure top candidates with high
EI. The most critical finding of this study is that even low-EI personnel have a
chance to thrive in the hospitality workplace with training on the proper use of
job autonomy, which in turn helps regulate stress. For example, companies could
use training programs of “lens-of-the-customers” or empathy-type to enhance
knowledge about customers’ unmet needs and their intention and behavior
(Sliter, Jex, Wolford, & McInnerney, 2010), potentially increasing low-EI
employees’ emotional capacity. Companies can then teach employees how to
exert their job autonomy and take appropriate discretionary actions. In addition
 Ma et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion 1085

to face-to-face training, in this digital age, it is feasible that all different service
scenarios based on real stories can be collected from previous or present front-
line employees and shared online (with suggested actions or actual actions
taken). Employees, such as low EI ones, could refer to this collection of stories
whenever needed. For cost-conscious, small hospitality firms, this online tool
alone may work effectively.
One of the best hospitality companies that has mastered the importance of job
autonomy is Ritz-Carlton; Ritz’s employees are given plentiful independence
and allowed to spend $2,000 (per employee, per guest) to resolve any customer
complaints (Brooks, 2000). This discretionary fund signifies the company’s trust
in and empowerment of its employees. It is often quoted that no two days are the
same in hospitality. Given this situation, as seen in Ritz-Carlton, top managers
should be confident in their frontline employees’ discretionary actions and boost
employees’ confidence with well-crafted service training in a supportive work
environment so that they can handle various challenges effectively.

Limitations and Future Research

Data of this study are from hotels and restaurants in one major city in the
United States. In the future, it is recommended that hospitality researchers
examine Karasek’s interactive JD-C model using various segments and different
regions or countries. For example, service failures in the airline industry are
devastating compared with service problems in hotels or restaurants. Missed or
cancelled flights often bring serious consequences to customers, not to mention
the high price of air travel. Employees’ ability to resolve service issues as soon
as possible is therefore essential in airlines. Thus, interactions between auton-
omy and CSS may be more pronounced, lending support to Karasek’s original
moderating hypothesis, regardless of individual characteristics. From a data
analysis perspective, although the measurement model of this study is sound
with a good model fit and reasonable reliabilities and validities of study con-
structs, a relatively small sample size may preclude some significant effects
(lack of power). Future study is warranted to validate the weak, two-way mod-
eration effect with larger samples.
Also, it would be interesting to see how autonomy influences frontline
employees in collective Asian culture where supervisors play a more prominent
role in handling complaints; autonomy may have little impact on or actually
increase frontline employees’ stress rather than buffer or decrease stress. EI is
treated as one construct with a combination of four dimensions combined in this
study. Future study could benefit from investigating the moderating role of each
dimension of EI. Last, it would be worthwhile to test other individual character-
istics as a third variable in the hospitality work setting. For example, the dispo-
sitional coping style is a good candidate as a third variable in the JD-C model
(three-way interactions) to see which type of copers utilize autonomy more
actively to reduce exhaustion or stress.
1086   JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH

Concluding Remarks

In conclusion, this study investigates how CSS, job autonomy, EI, and EE are
related to one another and highlights the important challenges that are associated
with work design and organizational interventions. From a theoretical point of
view, this study addresses a relatively unexplored area (JD-C model with a
three-way interaction), providing empirical evidence of how the joint effect of
individual and organizational resources can ease employees’ exhaustion from
frequent social interactions with customers. From a practical perspective, the
findings suggest that, in addition to recruiting hospitality-fit people (e.g., high
EI), hospitality companies must develop specific polices, trainings, and prac-
tices for frontline employees to be resilient to CSS.

References
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interac-
tions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A
review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.
doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
Ashforth, B. E. (1993). Emotional labor in service roles: The influence of identity.
Academy of Management Review, 18, 88-115. doi:10.5465/AMR.1993.3997508
Austin, E. J., Saklofske, D. H., & Egan, V. (2005). Personality, well-being and health
correlates of trait emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 38,
547-558.
Babakus, E., Yavas, U., & Karatepe, O. M. (2008). The effects of job demands, job
resources and intrinsic motivation on emotional exhaustion and turnover intentions:
A study in the Turkish hotel industry. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Administration, 9, 384-404. doi:10.1080/15256480802427339
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.
Bourbonnais, R., Comeau, M., & Vézina, M. (1999). Job strain and evolution of mental
health among nurses. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 95-107.
Brooks, R. (2000). Why loyal employees and customers improve the bottom line. Journal
for Quality and Participation, 23, 40-44.
Buck, R. (1984). The communication of emotion. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2017). Job openings and labor turnover survey (home page).
Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/jlt/
Chang, S.-J., van Witteloostuijn, A., & Eden, L. (2010). From the editors: Common
method variance in international business research. Journal of International Business
Studies, 41, 178-184. doi:10.1057/jibs.2009.88
Chiang, F. F. T., Birtch, T. A., & Kwan, H. K. (2010). The moderating roles of job
control and work-life balance practices on employee stress in the hotel and catering
industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29, 25-32. doi:10.1016/j.
ijhm.2009.04.005
Choi, C. H., Kim, T., Lee, G., & Lee, S. K. (2012). Testing the stressor-strain-outcome
model of customer-related social stressors in predicting emotional exhaustion,
 Ma et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion 1087

customer orientation and service recovery performance. International Journal of

Hospitality Management, 36, 272-285.
Ciarrochi, J. V., & Deane, F. P. (2001). Emotional competence and willingness to seek
help from professional and nonprofessional sources. British Journal of Guidance and
Counselling, 29, 233-246.
Dawson, J. F., & Richter, A. W. (2006). Probing three-way interactions in moderated
multiple regression: Development and application of a slope difference test. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 91, 917-926.
de Jonge, J., Dollard, M. F., Dormann, C., Le Blanc, P. M., & Houtman, I. L. D. (2000).
The demand-control model: Specific demands, specific control, and well-defined
groups. International Journal of Stress Management, 7, 269-287.
de Jonge, J., van Vegchel, N., Shimazu, A., Schaufeli, W., & Dormann, C. (2010). A lon-
gitudinal test of the demand–control model using specific job demands and specific
job control. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 17, 125-133.
Deloitte. (2010). Hospitality 2015, Game changers or spectators (Research report).
London, England: Author.
Dhar, R. L. (2016). Ethical leadership and its impact on service innovative behavior: The
role of LMX and job autonomy. Tourism Management, 57, 139-148.
Doef, M. van der, & Maes, S. (1999). The job demand-control (-support) model and
psychological well-being: A review of 20 years of empirical research. Work & Stress,
13, 87-114. doi:10.1080/026783799296084
Dormann, C., & Zapf, D. (2004). Customer-related social stressors and burnout. Journal
of Occupational Health Psychology, 9, 61-82.
Dudenhöffer, S., & Dormann, C. (2013). Customer-related social stressors and service
providers’ affective reactions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 520-539.
Endler, N. S., & Parker, J. D. A. (1994). Assessment of multidimensional coping:
Task, emotion, and avoidance strategies. Psychological Assessment, 6, 50-60.
doi:10.1037/1040-3590.6.1.50
Erez, A., & Isen, A. M. (2002). The influence of positive affect on the components of
expectancy motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1055-1067.
Fernet, C., Guay, F., & Senécal, C. (2004). Adjusting to job demands: The role of work
self-determination and job control in predicting burnout. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 65, 39-56. doi:10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00098-8
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unob-
servable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
Grandey, A. A. (2000). Emotional regulation in the workplace: A new way to conceptual-
ize emotional labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 95-110.
Györkös, C., Becker, J., Massoudi, K., de Bruin, G. P., & Rossier, J. (2015). The
impact of personality and culture on the job demands-control model of job stress.
Swiss Journal of Psychology/Schweizerische Zeitschrift Für Psychologie/Revue
Suisse de Psychologie, 71, 21-28. Retrieved from http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/
full/10.1024/1421-0185/a000065
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159-170. doi:10.1037/h0076546
Hancock, G. R., & Mueller, R. O. (2001). Rethinking construct reliability within latent
variable systems. Structural Equation Modeling: Present and Future, 195-216.
Hart, C. W. L., Heskett, J. L., & Sasser, W. E., Jr. (1990). The profitable art of service
recovery. Harvard Business Review, 68, 148-156.
1088   JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH

Hausser, J. A., Mojzisch, A., Niesel, M., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2010). Ten years on: A
review of recent research on the job demand-control (-support) model and psycho-
logical well-being. Work & Stress, 24, 1-35. doi:10.1080/02678371003683747
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing
stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513-524.
Hobfoll, S. E, & Shirom, A. (1993). Stress and burnout in the workplace: Conservation of
resources. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (Vol.
1, pp. 41-60). New York, NY: M. Dekker.
Hochschild, A. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hu, H.-H., Hu, H.-Y., & King, B. (2017). Impacts of misbehaving air passengers on
frontline employees: Role stress and emotional labor. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29, 1793-1813. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-09-
2015-0457
Huang, X., Chan, S. C., Lam, W., & Nan, X. (2010). The joint effect of leader–member
exchange and emotional intelligence on burnout and work performance in call centers
in China. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21, 1124-1144.
Huang, Z., & Miao, L. (2016). Illegitimate customer complaining behavior in hospital-
ity service encounters: A frontline employee perspective. Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Research, 40, 655-684. doi:10.1177/1096348013515916
Jaccard, J., Wan, C. K., & Turrisi, R. (1990). The detection and interpretation of inter-
action effects between continuous variables in multiple regression. Multivariate
Behavioral Research, 25, 467-478.
Jenkins, R. (1991). Demographic aspects of stress. In Personality and stress: individual
differences in the stress process (pp. 107-132). Oxford, England: Wiley.
Joseph, D. L., Jin, J., Newman, D. A., & O’Boyle, E. H. (2015). Why does self-reported
emotional intelligence predict job performance? A meta-analytic investigation of
mixed EI. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2014-39897-001/
Jung, H. S., & Yoon, H. H. (2016). Why is employees’ emotional intelligence important?
The effects of EI on stress-coping styles and job satisfaction in the hospitality indus-
try. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28, 1649-1675.
Karasek, R. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications
for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285-308.
Karasek, R., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work : Stress, productivity, and the recon-
struction of working life. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Karatepe, O. M. (2011). Do job resources moderate the effect of emotional disso-
nance on burnout? A study in the city of Ankara, Turkey. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 23, 44-65.
Karatepe, O. M. (2013). The effects of work overload and work-family conflict on
job embeddedness and job performance: The mediation of emotional exhaustion.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 25, 614-634.
Karatepe, O. M. (2015). Do personal resources mediate the effect of perceived organiza-
tional support on emotional exhaustion and job outcomes? International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27, 4-26.
Karatepe, O. M., & Aleshinloye, K. D. (2009). Emotional dissonance and emotional
exhaustion among hotel employees in Nigeria. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 28, 349-358. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.12.002
 Ma et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion 1089

Karatepe, O., Yorganci, I., & Haktanir, M. (2009). Outcomes of customer verbal aggres-
sion among hotel employees. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 21, 713-733.
Kim, H. J. (2008). Hotel service providers’ emotional labor: The antecedents and
effects on burnout. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27, 151-161.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2007.07.019
Kim, H. J., & Agrusa, J. (2011). Hospitality service employees’ coping styles: The role
of emotional intelligence, two basic personality traits, and socio-demographic fac-
tors. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30, 588-598. doi:10.1016/j.
ijhm.2010.11.003
Kim, H. J., Hur, W.-M., Moon, T.-W., & Jun, J.-K. (2017). Is all support equal? The
moderating effects of supervisor, coworker, and organizational support on the link
between emotional labor and job performance. BRQ Business Research Quarterly,
20, 124-136.
Kim, H. J., Shin, K. H., & Swanger, N. (2009). Burnout and engagement: A compara-
tive analysis using the Big Five personality dimensions. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 28, 96-104. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.06.001
Kim, H., & Stoner, M. (2008). Burnout and turnover intention among social workers:
Effects of role stress, job autonomy and social support. Administration in Social
Work, 32(3), 5-25.
Kim, T. T., Paek, S., Choi, C. H., & Lee, G. (2012). Frontline service employees’ cus-
tomer-related social stressors, emotional exhaustion, and service recovery perfor-
mance: Customer orientation as a moderator. Service Business, 6, 503-526.
Kline, R. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York,
NY: Guilford Press.
Laborde, S., Lautenbach, F., Allen, M. S., Herbert, C., & Achtzehn, S. (2014). The role
of trait emotional intelligence in emotion regulation and performance under pressure.
Personality and Individual Differences, 57, 43-47.
Lee, J. J., & Ok, C. (2012). Reducing burnout and enhancing job satisfaction: Critical
role of hotel employees’ emotional intelligence and emotional labor. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 31, 1101-1112.
MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2012). Common method bias in marketing:
Causes, mechanisms, and procedural remedies. Journal of Retailing, 88, 542-555.
doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2012.08.001
Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). Maslach burnout inventory manual. Palo Alto, CA:
Consulting Psychologists Press.
Meier, L. L., Semmer, N. K., Elfering, A., & Jacobshagen, N. (2008). The double
meaning of control: Three-way interactions between internal resources, job control,
and stressors at work. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13, 244-258.
doi:10.1037/1076-8998.13.3.244
Mikolajczak, M., Menil, C., & Luminet, O. (2007). Explaining the protective effect of
trait emotional intelligence regarding occupational stress: Exploration of emotional
labour processes. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 1107-1117.
Mikolajczak, M., Nelis, D., Hansenne, M., & Quoidbach, J. (2008). If you can regu-
late sadness, you can probably regulate shame: Associations between trait emotional
intelligence, emotion regulation and coping efficiency across discrete emotions.
Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1356-1368.
1090   JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH

Min, H., Kim, H. J., & Lee, S.-B. (2015). Extending the challenge–hindrance stressor
framework: The role of psychological capital. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 50, 105-114.
Min, H., Park, J., & Kim, H. J. (2016). Common method bias in hospitality research:
A critical review of literature and an empirical study. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 56, 126-135.
Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (2012). Mplus. The comprehensive modelling program for
applied researchers: User’s guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
National Restaurant Association. (2017). Hospitality employee turnover rate edged higher
in 2016. Retrieved from https://www.restaurant.org/Articles/News/Batch2_201901/
Hospitality-employee-turnover-rate-edged-higher-in
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill.
O’Neill, J. W., & Xiao, Q. (2010). Effects of organizational/occupational characteristics
and personality traits on hotel manager emotional exhaustion. International Journal
of Hospitality Management, 29, 652-658.
Park, R., & Searcy, D. (2012). Job autonomy as a predictor of mental well-being:
The moderating role of quality-competitive environment. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 27, 305-316.
Parker, S. K., & Sprigg, C. A. (1999). Minimizing strain and maximizing learning:
The role of job demands, job control, and proactive personality. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 84, 925-939.
Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2003). Trait emotional intelligence: Behavioural valida-
tion in two studies of emotion recognition and reactivity to mood induction. European
Journal of Personality, 17, 39-57.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common
method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recom-
mended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903. doi:10.1037/0021-
9010.88.5.879
Prentice, C., & King, B. (2011). The influence of emotional intelligence on the service
performance of casino frontline employees. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 11,
49-66.
Ross, G. F. (1997). Career stress responses among hospitality employees. Annals of
Tourism Research, 24, 41-51. doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(96)00032-1
Salovey, P., Bedell, B. T., Detweiler, J. B., & Mayer, J. D. (2000). Current directions
in emotional intelligence research. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.),
Handbook of emotions (2nd ed., pp. 504-520). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., Bhullar, N., & Rooke, S. E. (2007).
A meta-analytic investigation of the relationship between emotional intelligence
and health. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 921-933. doi:10.1016/j.
paid.2006.09.003
Sliter, M., Jex, S., Wolford, K., & McInnerney, J. (2010). How rude! Emotional labor
as a mediator between customer incivility and employee outcomes. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 15, 468-481.
Tracey, J. B., & Hinkin, T. R. (2006). The costs of employee turnover: When the devil is
in the details. Cornell Hospitality Report, 6(15), 4-16.
 Ma et al. / Social Stressors to Emotional Exhaustion 1091

Trinidad, D. R., & Johnson, C. A. (2002). The association between emotional intelligence
and early adolescent tobacco and alcohol use. Personality and Individual Differences,
32, 95-105.
Van Yperen, N. W., & Hagedoorn, M. (2003). Do high job demands increase intrinsic
motivation or fatigue or both? The role of job control and job social support. Academy
of Management Journal, 46, 339-348. doi:10.2307/30040627
Weber, K., Bradley, G. L., & Sparks, B. (2017). Stressor effects of negative online
reviews on anger and burnout in the restaurant industry. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29, 2847-2866.
Wong, C. S., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional i­ ntelligence
on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The leadership q­ uarterly, 13(3),
243-274.
Yoo, J. J.-E., Kim, T. T., & Lee, G. (2015). When customers complain: The value of
customer orientation in service recovery. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 56, 411-426.
doi:10.1177/1938965514566070
Zeidner, M., Matthews, G., & Roberts, R. D. (2004). Emotional intelligence in the work-
place: A critical review. Applied Psychology, 53, 371-399.

Submitted September 19, 2018

Accepted March 3, 2019
Refereed Anonymously

Zihui Ma, PhD (e-mail: zihui.ma@unlv.edu), is an assistant professor in residence in the

William F. Harrah College of Hospitality, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV. Hyun
Jeong Kim, PhD (e-mail: jennykim@wsu.edu), is a professor in the School of Hospitality
Business Management, Washington State University, Pullman, WA. Kang Hyun Shin,
PhD (e-mail: khs9933@ajou.ac.kr), is a professor at the Division of Social Sciences,
Ajou University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.