level of job satisfaction research paper

Pay Level Comparisons in Job Satisfaction Research and Mainstream Economic Methodology

• Research Paper
• Published: 03 April 2019
• Volume 21 , pages 825–842, ( 2020 )

Cite this article

• Stavros A. Drakopoulos   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9884-9261 1  

558 Accesses

3 Citations

Explore all metrics

Although social scientists have been investigating the nature and impact of job satisfaction for many decades, economists only started to investigate job satisfaction systematically in the late 1980′s. Almost from the first systematic studies of job satisfaction by economists, the research potential of the notion of pay level comparisons was realized. The idea of pay level comparisons in job satisfaction has proven particularly useful also because it has important implications for a number of standard theoretical and economic policy results. However, the inclusion of the variable of comparison wage in job satisfaction and the resulting supporting empirical findings, are in sharp contrast to the orthodox approach, given that in mainstream economic theory an individuals’ utility is usually assumed to be a function of absolute income only. Despite the important theoretical and policy implications, mainstream economic theory has not paid much heed to the job satisfaction conceptual formulations and empirical findings. The paper argues that there are methodological reasons for this state of affairs which seem to be linked to the subjective well-being research in general, and to the job satisfaction literature in particular. A strong mistrust against the method of stated preferences and the still inherent methodological bias against the integration of psychological findings, are suggested as the two prime reasons. Although a few prominent figures in job satisfaction research have realized the mainstream methodological attitude, it is necessary that job satisfaction specialists should consider more seriously the methodological limitations of traditional mainstream economics that relate to their research field.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Relative income and pay satisfaction: further evidence on the role of the reference group.

Laetitia Hauret & Donald R. Williams

Job Satisfaction and Reference Wages: Evidence for a Developing Country

Rodrigo Montero & Diego Vásquez

Wage Satisfaction and Reference Wages

For a historical account of psychological research on job satisfaction, see Latham and Budworth 2007 .

The idea that people compare their incomes with others, has a continuous presence in the history of economics. It can be found for example, in the works of T. Veblen, A.C. Pigou and J. Duesenberry. However, it has not made significant inroads into mainstream theory (for a detailed discussion, see Drakopoulos 2016 ).

For a discussion of the definition and nature of mainstream economics, see Lawson 2006 .

Apart from the economics literature, psychological studies have also identified a number of crucial job satisfaction determinants such as salary, job autonomy, opportunities for promotion, quality of supervision, and good working conditions (e.g. Barling et al. 2003 ).

A representative statement in this respect can be found in Robert Frank: “In traditional economic models, individual utility depends only on absolute consumption. These models lie at the heart of claims that pursuit of individual self-interest promotes aggregate welfare.” (Frank 2005 : 137).

It is also interesting to note that the authors point out that economists have paid little attention to the relevant psychological findings (Caplin and Leahy 2001 : 55).

Status effects have been found for Great-Britain (Sloane and Williams 2000 ), Germany (Ferrer-i-Carbonell 2005 ), Sweden (Bygren 2004 ), Europe (Senik 2008 ; Clark and Senik 2010 ). See also Warr ( 2007 ) for a survey.

The case of corrective taxes is also weakened in the framework of mental goods and bads (for a detailed discussion, see Ho 2016 ).

In more technical terms: The additional tax paid by an individual who does an extra hour of work should equal the money value of the harm done to others in terms of status. It is also worth noticing that in the extreme case where net income is not valued for its own sake at all and all persons have the same wage, the optimal marginal tax is unity (for a detailed discussion, see Layard 1980 : 738–739).

In support of this point, researchers have found that other factors like specific government policies have strong effects on happiness (see for instance, Bok 2011 ; Ott 2011 ).

There is a large literature on this important issue. A few recent indicative examples are: Akerlof 1997 ; Sen 2002 ; Sobel 2005 ; Davis 2010 ; Postlewaite 2011 ; Heffetz and Frank 2011 .

I am grateful for this point to an anonymous referee.

For other types of defense of mainstream economics against the “attacks” by behavioural economists and psychologists, see McKenzie 2010 .

Adams, J. S. (1963). Towards an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 422–436.

Article   Google Scholar  

Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New York: Academic Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Akerlof, G. (1997). Social distance and social decisions. Econometrica, 65, 1005–1027.

Akerlof, G. A., Rose, A. K., Yellen, J. L., Ball, L., & Hall, R. E. (1988). Job switching and job satisfaction in the US labor market. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2, 495–594.

Argyle, M. (1989). The social psychology of work . Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Google Scholar  

Barling, J., Kelloway, E. K., & Iverson, R. D. (2003). High: Quality work, job satisfaction and occupational injuries. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 276–283.

Berg, N. (2003). Normative behavioral economics. Journal of Socio-Economics, 32, 411–427.

Berg, N. (2006). Behavioral Labor Economics. In M. Altman (Ed.), Hand book of contemporary behavioral economics (pp. 457–478). New York: M.E. Sharpe.

Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2001). Do people mean what they say? Implications for subjective survey data. American Economic Review, 91, 67–72.

Binmore, K. (1999). Why experiment in economics? Economic Journal, 109, F16–F24.

Blanchflower, D., & Oswald, A. (2004). Well-being over time in Britain and the USA. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1359–1386.

Blinder, A. (1991). Why are prices sticky? Preliminary results from an interview study. American Economic Review, 81, 89–96.

Böckerman, P., & Ilmakunnas, P. (2008). Interaction of working conditions, job satisfaction, and sickness absences: Evidence from a representative sample of employees. Social Science and Medicine, 67, 520–528.

Bok, D. (2011). The politics of happiness: What government can learn from the new research on well-being . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Bonsang, E., & Van Soest, A. (2012). Satisfaction with job and income among older individuals across European countries. Social Indicators Research, 105 (2), 227–254.

Borjas, G. J. (1979). Job satisfaction, wages and unions. Journal of Human Resources, 14, 21–40.

Boulier, B., & Goldfarb, R. (1998). On the use and nonuse of surveys in economics. Journal of Economic Methodology, 5, 1–21.

Boyce, C., Brown, G. D. A., & Moore, S. (2010). Money and happiness: Rank of income, not income, affects life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 21, 471–475.

Bridges, J. (2003). Stated preference methods in health care evaluation: an emerging methodological paradigm in health economics. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 2, 213–224.

Brown, G., Gordon, D., Gardner, J., Oswald, A., & Qian, J. (2008). Does wage rank affect employees’ wellbeing? Industrial Relations, 47, 355–389.

Bruni, L., & Sugden, R. (2007). The road not taken: How psychology was removed from economics, and how it might be brought back. The Economic Journal, 117, 146–173.

Bryson, A., Barth, E., & Dale-Olsen, H. (2012). Do higher wages come at a price? Journal of Economic Psychology, 33, 251–263.

Bygren, M. (2004). Pay reference standards and pay satisfaction: what do workers evaluate their pay against? Social Science Research, 33, 206–224.

Caplin, A., & Leahy, J. (2001). Psychological expected utility and anticipatory feelings. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 55–80.

Cappelli, P., & Sherer, P. D. (1988). Satisfaction, market wages and labour relations: An airline study. Industrial Relations, 27, 56–73.

Card, D., Mas, A., Moretti, E., & Saez, E. (2012). Inequality at work: The effect of peer salaries on job satisfaction. American Economic Review, 102, 2981–3003.

Clark, A. (1996). ‘L’utilité est-elle relative? Analyse à l’aide de données sur les ménages’. Economie et Prévision, 121, 151–164.

Clark, A. (1997). Job satisfaction and gender: Why are women so happy at work? Labour Economics, 4, 341–372.

Clark, A. (2001). What really matters in a job? Hedonic measurement using quit data. Labour Economics, 8, 223–242.

Clark, A., Kristensen, N., & Westergaard-Nielsen, N. (2009). Job satisfaction and co-worker wages: Status or signal? Economic Journal, 119, 430–447.

Clark, A., & Oswald, A. (1996). Satisfaction and comparison income. Journal of Public Economics, 61, 359–381.

Clark, A., & Senik, C. (2010). ‘Who compares to whom? The anatomy of income comparisons in Europe. Economic Journal, 120, 573–594.

Clark, A., & Senik, C. (2014). Income comparisons in China. In A. Clark & C. Senik (Eds.), Happiness and economic growth: Lessons from developing countries (pp. 216–239). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Davis, J. B. (2003). The theory of the individual in economics: Identity and value . London: Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Davis, J. B. (2010). Individuals and identity in economics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Davis, L. (2018) Growth, inequality and tunnel effects: A formal mode. Journal of Happiness Studies . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-018-9991-1 .

Di Tella, R., Haisken De-New, J., & MacCulloch, R. (2010). Happiness adaptation to income and to status in an individual panel. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 76, 834–852.

Dow, S. (2002). Economic methodology: An inquiry . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Drakopoulos, S. (2016). Comparisons in economic thought: Economic interdependency reconsidered . London: Routledge.

Drakopoulos, S., & Grimani, K. (2013). Injury: Related absenteeism and job satisfaction: Insights from Greek and UK data. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24, 3496–3511.

Drakopoulos, S., & Katselidis, I. (2015). From edgeworth to econophysics: A methodological perspective. Journal of Economic Methodology, 22, 77–95.

Drakopoulos, S., & Theodossiou, I. (1997). Job Satisfaction and target earnings. Journal of Economic Psychology, 18, 694–704.

Easterlin, R. (2004). The reluctant economist: Perspectives on economics . Economic History and Demography, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fafchamps, M., & Shilpi, F. (2008). Subjective welfare, isolation and relative consumption. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 88, 83–60.

Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. (2006). The economics of fairness, reciprocity and altruism-Experimental evidence and new theories. In S. Kolm & J. M. Ythier (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of giving, altruism and reciprocity (pp. 615–684). Oxford: North-Holland.

Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2005). Income and well-being: An empirical analysis of the comparison income effect. Journal of Public Economics, 89, 997–1019.

Fisher, I. (1892) [1965] Mathematical Investigations in the Theory of Value and Prices, New Haven: Yale University Press.

Fourcade, M., Ollion, E., & Algan, Y. (2015). The superiority of economists. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29, 89–114.

Frank, R. (2005). Positional externalities cause large and preventable welfare losses. American Economic Review, 95 (2), 137–141.

Frank, R. (2008). Should public policy respond to positional externalities? Journal of Public Economics, 92, 1777–1786.

Frantz, R. (Ed.). (2009). Renaissance in behavioral economics: Essays in honour of Harvey Leibenstein . London: Routledge.

Freeman, R. B. (1978). Job satisfaction as an economic variable. American Economic Review, 68, 135–141.

Frey, B. (2008). Happiness: A revolution in economics . Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Frey, B. (2018). Economics and Well-Being. In V. Zeigler-Hill & T. K. Shackelford (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of personality and individual differences (pp. 552–567). London: SAGE Publication Ltd.

Frey, B., & Benz, M. (2004). From Imperialism to inspiration: A survey of economics and psychology. In J. Davis, A. Marciano, & J. Runde (Eds.), The Elgar companion to economics and philosophy (pp. 61–83). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Gao, W., & Smyth, R. (2010). ‘Job satisfaction and relative income in economic transition: Status or signal? The case of urban China. China Economic Review, 21, 442–455.

Godeshot, O., & Senik, C. (2015). Wage comparisons in and out of the firm. Evidence from a matched employer-employee French database. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 117, 395–410.

Goodwin, C. (2016). Economics and psychology: Why the great divide? History of Political Economy, 48 (suppl. 1), 71–169.

Hagerty, M. (2000). Social comparisons of income in one’s community: Evidence from national surveys of income and happiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 764–771.

Hamermesh, D. (1977). Economic aspects of job satisfaction. In O. Ashenfelter & W. Oates (Eds.), Essays in labor market analysis (pp. 53–72). Toronto: John Wiley and Son.

Hamermesh, D. (2001). The changing distribution of job satisfaction. Human Resources, 36, 1–30.

Hands, W. (2010). Economics, psychology, and the history of consumer choice theory. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34 (4), 633–648.

Hauret, L., & Williams, D. R. (2017). Relative income and pay satisfaction: Further evidence on the role of the reference group’. Journal of Happiness Studies . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9950-2 .

Heffetz, O., & Frank, R. (2011). Preferences for status: Evidence and economic implications. In J. Benhabib, A. Bisin, & M. Jackson (Eds.), Handbook of social economics (Vol. 1A, pp. 69–91). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Hirschman, A. O., & Rothschild, M. (1973). The changing tolerance for income inequality in the course of economic development. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87, 544–566.

Ho, L. S. (2016). The psychology and economics of happiness: Love, life and positive living . London: Routledge.

Homans, G. (1961). Social behaviour: Its elementary forms . New York: Harcourt Brace.

Hopkins, E., & Kornienko, T. (2004). Running to keep in the same place: Consumer choice as a game of status. American Economic Review, 94, 1085–1107.

Hyman, H. (1942). The psychology of status. Archives of Psychology, 38 (269), 147–165.

Ireland, N. (1998). Status-seeking, income taxation and efficiency. Journal of Public Economics, 70, 99–113.

Ireland, N. (2001). Optimal income tax in the presence of status effects. Journal of Public Economics, 81, 193–212.

Judge, T., Weiss, H., Kammeyer-Mueller, J., & Hulin, C. (2017). Job attitudes, job satisfaction, and job affect: A century of continuity and of change. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102 (3), 356–374.

Kifle, T. (2014). Do comparison wages play a major role in determining overall job satisfaction? Evidence from Australia. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 613–638.

Knight, J., & Gunatilaka, R. (2011). Income, aspirations and the hedonic treadmill in a poor society. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 82, 67–81.

Latham, G. P., & Budworth, M. H. (2007). The study of work motivation in the 20th century. In L. L. Koppes (Ed.), Historical perspectives in industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 353–381). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Lawson, T. (2006). The nature of heterodox economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 30 (4), 483–505.

Layard, R. (1980). Human satisfactions and public policy. Economic Journal, 90, 737–750.

Layard, R. (2006). Happiness and public policy: A challenge to the profession. Economic Journal, 116 (510), C24–C33.

Lecouteux, G. (2013). Reconciling normative and behavioural economics. Cahier de Recherche, 2013-09, hal-00819763.

Levine, D. (2012). Is behavioral economics doomed? The ordinary versus the extraordinary . Cambridge: Open Book Publishers.

Levitt, S. D., & List, J. A. (2008). Homo economicus evolves. Science, 319 (5865), 909–910.

Lewin, S. (1996). Economics and psychology: Lessons for our own day from the early Twentieth Century. Journal of Economic Literature, XXXIV, 1293–1323.

List, J., Berrens, R., Bohara, A., & Kerkvliet, J. (2004). Examining the role of social isolation on stated preferences. The American Economic Review, 94 (3), 741–752.

Locke, E. A. (1976). The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction. In M. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297–1349). Chicago: Rand McNally.

Manski, C. (2004). Measuring expectations. Econometrica, 72, 1329–1376.

McBride, M. (2001). Relative-income effects on subjective well-being in the cross-section. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 45, 251–278.

McKenzie, R. (2010). Predictably rational? In search of defences for rational behavior in economics . Dordrecht: Springer.

McLure, M. (2010). Pareto and Pigou on ophelimity, utility and welfare: Implications for public finance. European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 17, 635–657.

Miller, P. (1990). Trade unions and job satisfaction. Australian Economic Papers, 29, 226–248.

Montero, R., & Vasquez, D. (2015). Job satisfaction and reference wages: Evidence for a developing country. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16, 1493–1507.

Ng, Y.-K. (1987). Diamonds are a government’s best friend: Burden-free taxes on goods valued for their values. American Economic Review, 77 (1), 186–191.

Ng, Y.-K. (2003). From preference to happiness: Towards a more complete welfare economics. Social Choice and Welfare, 20, 307–350.

Ott, J. (2011). Government and happiness in 130 nations: Good governance fosters higher level and more equality of happiness. Social Indicators Research, 102, 3–22.

Pareto V. (1906) [1971] Manual of political economy, (A. Schrier, Trans.). London: Macmillan.

Pearce, D. (2002). An intellectual history of environmental economics. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, 27, 57–81.

Postlewaite, A. (2011). Social norms and preferences. In J. Benhabib, A. Bisin, & M. Jackson (Eds.), Handbook of social economics (Vol. 1A, ch2, pp. 31–67). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Powdthavee, N. (2007). Economics of happiness: A review of literature and applications. Chulalongkorn Journal of Economics, 19 (1), 51–73.

Powdthavee, N. (2009). How important is rank to individual perception of economic standing? A within community analysis. Journal of Economic Inequality, 7, 225–248.

Rabin, M. (2002). A perspective on psychology and economics. European Economic Review, 46, 657–685.

Robbins, L. (1932). An essay on the nature and significance of economic science . London: Macmillan.

Ross, D. (2014). Philosophy of economics . New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Runciman, W. G. (1966). Relative deprivation and social justice . Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Samuelson, P. (1938). A note on the pure theory of consumer’s behaviour. Economica, 5, 61–71.

Samuelson, P. (1947) [1963] Foundations of economic analysis , Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press.

Sen, A. (2002). Rationality and freedom . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Senik, C. (2004). When information dominates comparison. Learning from Russian subjective panel data. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 2099–2133.

Senik, C. (2008). Ambition and jealousy: Income interactions in the “Old Europe” versus the “New Europe” and the United States. Economica, 75, 495–513.

Senik, C. (2009). Direct evidence on income comparisons and their welfare effects. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 72, 408–424.

Sent, E.-M. (2004). Behavioral economics: how psychology made its (limited) way back into economics. History of Political Economy, 36, 735–760.

Shields, M., & Price, S. (2002). Racial harassment, job satisfaction and intentions to quit: Evidence from British Nursing profession. Economica, 69, 295–362.

Sloane, P., & Ward, M. (2001). Cohort effects and job satisfaction of academics. Applied Economics Letters, 8, 787–791.

Sloane, P. J., & Williams, H. (2000). Job satisfaction, comparison earnings and gender. Labor, 14, 473–502.

Sobel, J. (2005). Interdependent preferences and reciprocity. Journal of Economic Literature, XLIII, 392–436.

Sousa-Poza, A., & Sousa-Poza, A. (2000). Well-being at work: a cross-national analysis of the levels and determinants of job satisfaction. Journal of Socio-economics, 29, 517–538.

Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: application, assessment, causes and consequences . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Stewart, N., Chater, N., & Brown, G. D. A. (2006). Decision by sampling. Cognitive Psychology, 53 (1), 1–26.

Stigler, G., & Becker, G. (1977). De gustibus non est disputandum. The American Economic Review, 67, 76–90.

Theodossiou, I. & Panos, G. (2007) Earnings aspirations and job satisfaction: The affective and cognitive impact of earnings comparisons. University of Aberdeen Centre for European Labour Market Research , No 2007-1 (pp. 1–38).

Van Praag, B. (1991). Ordinal and cardinal utility: An Integration of the two dimensions of the welfare concept. Journal of Econometrics, 50, 69–89.

Van Praag, B. (2011). Well-being inequality and reference groups: An agenda for new research. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 9, 111–127.

Van Praag, B., & Ferrer-i-Carbonel, A. (2004). Happiness quantified: A satisfaction calculus approach . New York: Oxford University Press.

Warr, P. B. (2007). Work, happiness, and unhappiness . New York: Routledge.

Zouboulakis, M. (2014). The varieties of economic rationality . London: Routledge.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank Prof. Y. Venieris and two anonymous referees of this Journal for useful comments and suggestions. The usual disclaimer applies.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Philosophy and History of Science, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece

Stavros A. Drakopoulos

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stavros A. Drakopoulos .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Drakopoulos, S.A. Pay Level Comparisons in Job Satisfaction Research and Mainstream Economic Methodology. J Happiness Stud 21 , 825–842 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-019-00111-z

Download citation

Published : 03 April 2019

Issue Date : March 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-019-00111-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Job satisfaction
• Pay level comparisons
• Economic methodology

JEL Classification

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

JOB SATISFACTION AND EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE: A THEORETICAL REVIEW OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TWO VARIABLES

In today's increasing competitive environment, organizations recognize the internal human element as a fundamental source of improvement. On one hand, managers are concentrating on employees' wellbeing, wants, needs, personal goals and desires, to understand the job satisfaction. And on the other hand, managers take organizational decisions based on the employees' performance. The purpose of this study is to identify the factors influencing job satisfaction and the determinants of employee performance, and accordingly reviewing the relationship between them. This study is an interpretivist research that focuses on exploring the influence of job satisfaction on employee performance and vice, the influence of employee performance on job satisfaction. The study also examines the nature of the relationship between these two variables. The study reveals the dual direction of the relationship that composes a cycle cause and effect relationship, so satisfaction leads to performance and performance leads to satisfaction through number of mediating factors. Successful organizations are those who apply periodic satisfaction and performance measurement tests to track the level of these important variables and set the corrective actions.

Related Papers

SCIE Australia

http://www.scie.org.au/ Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to discuss on the concept of job satisfaction and how job satisfaction can make impact on the performance of employees in an organization. The paper will be limited to the positive and negative effects of Job satisfaction. Secondly, the literature review will discuss the relationship between employee motivation, job satisfaction and employee performance

Tolossa Chaffa

Employee attitude is very important for management to determine the behavior of workers in the organization. The usually judgment about employees is that " A satisfied worker is a productive worker ". If employees are satisfied then it will create a pleasant atmosphere within the organization to perform in a better and efficient manner, therefore, job satisfaction and its relation with organizational performance has become a major topic for research studies. The specific problem covered in this study is to scrutinize the impact of job satisfaction on organizational performance. It considered which rewards (intrinsic and extrinsic) determine job satisfaction of an employee and its relation with organizational performance. It also reviewed the influence of age, sex and experience of employees on level of job satisfaction. It also covered and investigated different events which can satisfy the employees on jobs, their retention in the job, and why employees stay and leave the organization. Data were collected through conducting detailed field survey using questionnaires from different employee (exit interview of outgoing employees) groups like management, senior managers, managers, professionals and support staff from five profit/non-profit sector organizations. The data analysis shows that there exists positive correlation between job satisfaction and organizational performance. Introduction Job satisfaction of employees plays a very vital role on the performance of an organization. It is essential to know as to how employees can be retained through making them satisfied and motivated to achieve extraordinary results. Target and achievement depends on employee satisfaction and in turn contribute for organizational success and growth, enhances the productivity, and increases the quality of work.

Advances in economics, business and management research

Teten mohamad Sapril Mubarok

Review of Behavioral Aspect in Organizations and Society

Vita Yuli Alfiyana

Basically, performance is something that is individual because each employee has a different level of ability to do their jobs. Performance depends on the combination of ability, effort, and opportunity obtained. Employee performance is capital for companies to survive and develop in responding to business and business competition today, advanced and developing companies are very dependent on reliable human resources so that the output is high performance on employee performance which will later affect the company's performance. However, it is not easy to maintain and improve employee performance. There are many factors that can affect performance. Many employee turnovers occur due to a lack of satisfaction with work. Employee performance is very dependent on the value of employee satisfaction in the workplace. The fulfillment of employee rights greatly affects the performance of the organization. So, in this study the focus of the study would like to see the extent of the influ...

Prof (Dr). MD Pushpakumari

Employee attitudes are important to management because they determine the behavior of workers in the organization. The commonly held opinion is that “A satisfied worker is a productive worker”. A satisfied work force will create a pleasant atmosphere within the organization to perform well. Hence job satisfaction has become a major topic for research studies. The specific problem addressed in this study is to examine the impact of job satisfaction on performance. It considered which rewards (intrinsic and extrinsic) determine job satisfaction of an employee. It also considered influence of age, sex and experience of employees on level of job satisfaction. In addition it investigated in most satisfying event of an employee in the job, why employees stay and leave the organization. Data were collected through a field survey using a questionnaire from three employee groups, namely Professionals, Managers and Non-managers from twenty private sector organizations covering five industries...

Journal ijmr.net.in(UGC Approved)

Employee attitudes are important to management because they determine the behaviour of workers in the organization. The commonly held opinion is that “A satisfied worker is a productive worker”. A satisfied work force will create a pleasant atmosphere within the organization to perform well. It investigated the most satisfying event of an employee in the job, why employees stay and leave the organization. Job satisfaction is a general attitude towards one’s job, the difference between the amount of reward workers receive and the amount they believe they should receive. Employee is a back bone of every organization, without employee no work can be done. So employee’s satisfaction is very important. Employees will be more satisfied if they get what they expected, job satisfaction relates to inner feelings of workers. Key words: Job satisfaction, Rewards, Effort, Performance INTRODUCTION The correlation between the Job

Dhanashree Kulkarni

Haziq Sheikh

The research reported in this thesis was on “Effects of job satisfaction on employee‟s performance”. The purpose of research was to study the various factors that have been significant in determining employee performance and their importance with respect to the employees of Pakistan. The secondary data was collected by Internet and also from the material printed by different Scholars from all over the world. The primary data was gathered by floating questionnaires in Hassan leather industry Sheikhupura, Pakistan. SPSS was applied to analyze the gathered information through running Correlation tests on the variables in the study. The reliability of the data was measured with the help of the Cronbach‟s Alpha value which too was calculated using the SPSS software. The findings provided an insight and estimation towards the impact of financial and Non-Financial reward system on employee‟s performance. All the variables have been found to be significant in determining employee‟s performa...

Dr Ali Iftikhar Choudhary , Asad Humayon

Journal of emerging technologies and innovative research

Sourav Gangopadhyay

RELATED PAPERS

Jonathan Morton

Camila Valenzuela

Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia

Fernando DE PAULA LEONEL

Specijalna edukacija i rehabilitacija

Nenad Glumbić

El Arma de la Crítica Fanesca Política (Boston) Línea de Fuego (Quito) Opción (Quito) Semanario El Sol (Gualaceo) Sociotramas (Quito)

Jaime Chuchuca-Serrano

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management

Sandra lorena Albarez Martínez

Marine Mammal Science

Jordi Plana

General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Genome Medicine

Madikay Senghore

Computers in Cardiology 1999. Vol.26 (Cat. No.99CH37004)

Abanico Veterinario

Vinsensius Huvang

Historia Colombiana I Vida y economía urbana en La Nueva Granada

Esteban Penagos

Julio Pérez

Joost Vaesen

James Willis

African Journal of Biological Sciences

Waheed Emam

Social Security in the Global Village

Nadine Richez-Battesti

Carlos Filho

Thainá do Nascimento

Military Medicine

David Orman

Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition

Reda Shamie

Rosaura del Pilar Castrillon Mendoza

Psychiatry Research

Belen Arranz

hjhds jyuttgf

Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks

Norbert Buzas

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Open access
• Published: 10 April 2024

Stress, interpersonal and inter-role conflicts, and psychological health conditions among nurses: vicious and virtuous circles within and beyond the wards

• Federica Vallone 1 &
• Maria Clelia Zurlo   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0045-2800 2  

BMC Psychology volume  12 , Article number:  197 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

The increasing costs of nurses’ occupational-stress, conflicts, and violence within healthcare services have raised international interest. Yet, research/interventions should consider that perceived stress and conflicts– but also potential resources– within the wards can crossover the healthcare settings, impacting nurses’ private lives and viceversa , potentially creating vicious circles exacerbating stress, conflicts/violence or, conversely, virtuous circles of psychological/relational wellbeing. Based on the Demands-Resources-and-Individual-Effects (DRIVE) Nurses Model , and responding to the need to go in-depth into this complex dynamic, this study aims to explore potential vicious circles featured by the negative effects of the interplay (main/mediating effects) between perceived stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflicts (Conflicts-with-Physicians, Peers, Supervisors, Patients/their families), work-family inter-role conflicts (Work-Family/Family-Work-Conflicts), and work-related stress (Effort-Reward-Imbalance) on nurses’ psychological/relational health (Anxiety, Depression, Somatization, Interpersonal-Sensitivity, Hostility). The potential moderating role of work-resources (Job-Control, Social-Support, Job-Satisfaction) in breaking vicious circles/promoting virtuous circles was also explored.

The STROBE Checklist was used to report this cross-sectional multi-centre study. Overall, 265 nurses completed self-report questionnaires. Main/mediating/moderating hypotheses were tested by using Correlational-Analyses and Hayes-PROCESS-tool.

Data confirmed the hypothesized detrimental vicious circles (main/mediating effects), impairing nurses’ psychological health conditions at individual level (Anxiety, Depression, Somatization), but also at relational level (Hostility and Interpersonal-Sensitivity). The moderating role of all work resources was fully supported.

Findings could be used to implement interventions/practices to effectively prevent the maintenance/exacerbation of vicious circles and promote psychological/relational wellbeing in healthcare settings and beyond.

Peer Review reports

Promoting occupational health and safety in the healthcare sector is a serious concern globally, and it is still at the heart of the international debate [ 1 , 2 ]. Specifically, in recent decades, growing concern and attention have been given to nursing professionals [ 3 , 4 ], who are required to achieve gold standard with fewer resources (e.g., staff shortage), to perform more of the daily care activities in direct contact with patients/their relatives, as well as to coordinate– to a greater extent– with colleagues (other nurses and physicians). This results in higher risk of perceiving imbalance between expended efforts and received rewards/recognitions for their work [ 5 , 6 ] and feeling more emotionally exhausted than other healthcare professionals [ 7 , 8 ].

Recently, responding to the need to provide a tailored tool to assess work-related stress and develop effective interventions promoting occupational health among nursing professionals, research has provided a statistically valid multidimensional transactional model [ 9 ]. Based on the Demands-Resources and Individual Effects Model ( DRIVE Model ) [ 10 , 11 , 12 ], this model, namely the DRIVE-Nurses Model , allows to simultaneously account for the impact of the complex interplay (main, mediating, moderating effects) of a wide range of individual, situational, and relational dimensions to be adopted in the public healthcare services for a broad assessment of risks and protective factors influencing nurses’ psychological and physical health conditions [ 9 ]. Specifically, the model includes the following dimensions: Work Characteristics – integrating Effort-Reward Imbalance Model dimensions [ 13 ] and Job Demands-Control-Support Model dimensions [ 14 ]– along with Individual Characteristics (i.e., socio-demographics, coping strategies, personality factors), and Work–Family Interface Dimensions (i.e., Work–family inter-role conflict; job/life satisfaction).

Noticeably, the abovementioned model fully embodies the more renowned perspective for achieving a greater and more comprehensive understanding of workers’ life, namely the Work-Family Spillover perspective [ 15 , 16 ]. The latter approach reconceptualises the complexity of the workers’ lives, extending to the understanding of individual’s life. It suggests that research/interventions need to take into account that the positive and the negative feelings/experiences in one domain (workplace or family/private) are able to crossover their boundaries, having a positive (enrichment) or negative (conflict) impact also on the other one domain.

In line with this, recent research applications of the DRIVE-Nurses Model specifically targeted the examination of perceived inter-role conflict among nurses [ 17 ]. In particular, evidence was provided for the detrimental impact of perceived work-family conflict among both male and female nurses, yet it was also supported the moderating role of work-resources, such as perceived job control, social support, and job satisfaction. These resources were indeed found able to significantly buffer/counteract the negative effects of perceived inter-role conflict among nurses.

Nowadays, besides the meaningful of focussing on perceived conflict between work and private life, and in line with the spillover perspective , research highlighted another key issue that needs to be carefully targeted globally, namely perceived conflict and violence within the healthcare settings [ 18 , 19 , 20 ]. Indeed, about 63% of healthcare workers worldwide reported they have experienced any form of violence and conflict within the workplace [ 2 , 21 ], including verbal abuses, such as threatening/bullying/offending/excluding behaviours (e.g., shouting, insults, overload in work shifts), and/or physical abuses (e.g., assaults/aggressions, attempted assaults/aggressions).

This already high rate should however be evaluated with caution, since episodes of violence– mainly linked to exacerbation of conflicts and non-physical abuses– are still often not reported, underreported and/or partially documented by nurses, mainly due to the stigma of victimization (i.e., shame, fear of judgement, blame/non-supportive environment), fear of consequences for their selves/fear of lack of consequences for the perpetrators, as well as due to the lack of knowledge about the reporting process/systems [ 22 , 23 ]. Furthermore, there is still lack of knowledge and clarity on what constitute a violence, thus verbal abuses and exacerbation of interpersonal conflicts are often not reported since they are underestimated and believed as not enough serious to seek for support [ 24 , 25 , 26 ].

Notwithstanding, in recent decades, research targeted this key topic, underlining the need to identify both the potentially different actors/critical relations involved onto conflictual/violent dynamics (i.e., stressors linked to interpersonal conflict) and the consequences of such issue [ 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 ]. Indeed, several studies have underlined not only nurses’ risk of reporting decreasing performance, lower quality of care, and higher turnover intention [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ], but also the severe risk for nurses’ psychological health conditions, in terms of anxiety, depression [ 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ], and somatization [ 39 , 40 ]. Some studies have also underlined the impact of perceived workplace violence in terms of increasing frustration, disruptions in the relationships with co-workers [ 41 ], inappropriate professional communication [ 4 ], and growing hostility [ 32 , 34 , 42 ], with even some evidence suggesting the risk of a spiral effect of violence and interpersonal conflict [ 43 ].

Nonetheless, despite the well-demonstrated worrisome high prevalence of perceived occupational stress, violence/conflicts towards and between nurses, and the growing implementation of programmes targeting this issue, there is still lack of research focusing on this phenomenon by adopting a more comprehensive and dynamic approach. This, however, could allow gaining further insight into the complex relationship between perceived stress, conflicts and psychological/relational wellbeing experienced within and outside the wards. Indeed, the interplay between work and private lives is rather complex and tangled [ 44 ]. Accordingly, perceived sources of stress and conflicts– along with the potential resources– within the wards are able to crossover the healthcare settings, impacting nurses’ personal lives and viceversa , thus potentially creating vicious circles exacerbating stress, conflicts, imbalances, psychological suffering, anger and hostility or, conversely, sustaining virtuous circles of psychological and relational wellbeing.

Therefore, there is a need to provide updated evidence which based on exploring in-depth more complex dynamics featuring the reciprocity of the experiences within the wards and outside the wards. Additionally, there is a need to investigate the impact of workplace violence and conflicts by assessing the risk of reporting a wider range of potential outcomes, such as interpersonal-sensitivity and hostility, which are of particular interest when examining interpersonal relationships. Unveiling vicious and virtuous circles could indeed effectively inform the development of tailored research and evidence-based interventions.

The present study proposed a research application of the DRIVE-Nurses Model [ 9 ] to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of the issue of stress, violence and conflictual dynamics in nursing. In the present paper, we will analyse the issue of workplace violence and conflict by assessing perceived stressors linked to interpersonal conflict in nursing [ 45 ]– namely perceived stress linked to problems/conflicts with physicians, with peers, with supervisors as well as with patients and their families– rather than by assessing the frequency of episodes of violence/conflicts occurred. This choice was made given the phenomena of underreported/underestimated events of violence and conflicts– mainly non-physical ones [ 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 ]. It was indeed hoped that focusing on perceived problems and conflicts in the interpersonal life of nurses– rather than assessing events of violence within these relationships– would elicit a more open reflection on this hidden phenomenon, giving further research attention to the more subtle forms of experiences of violence in nursing.

Specifically, the study has a twofold objective in mind: (1) To explore potential vicious circles featured by the negative effects of the interplay (main/mediating effects) between perceived stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflicts (Conflicts-with-Physicians, Peers, Supervisors, Patients/their families), work-family inter-role conflicts (Work-Family/Family-Work Conflicts), and work-related stress dimensions (Effort-Reward-Imbalance) on nurses’ psychological and relational health conditions (Anxiety, Depression, Somatization, Interpersonal-Sensitivity, Hostility); (2) To test the potential moderating role of work resources (Job-Control, Social-Support, Job-Satisfaction) in breaking vicious circles/promoting virtuous circles. Accordingly, detailed hypotheses have been developed and tested (Fig.  1 ).

Conceptual Framework: Main, Mediating and Moderating Hypotheses

Firstly, considering the evidence suggesting the detrimental impact of workplace violence and conflicts [ 4 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 39 , 41 , 46 , 47 ], of work-family inter-role conflict [ 4 , 17 ], as well as of work-related stress [ 9 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ] on nurses’ psychological and relational health conditions, the following hypothesis was proposed:

Hypothesis one (H1)– Main Effects . Perceived stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflicts (H1a), work-family inter-role conflicts (H1b), and work-related stress (H1c) dimensions will be positively related to nurses’ psychological and relational health conditions.

Secondly, considering the evidence suggesting the potential of perceived workplace conflict/violence in exacerbating perceived levels of work-family inter-role conflicts [ 4 , 53 ], and work-related stress [ 33 , 54 , 55 , 56 ], as well as the potential of vicious circles of stress and conflicts exacerbating psychological and relational suffering [ 43 ], the following hypothesis was tested.

Hypothesis two (H2)– Mediating Effects . Perceived stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflicts will be positively related to work-family inter-role conflicts (H2a) and to work-related stress (H2b) dimensions. In addition, work-family inter-role conflicts (H2c) and work-related stress (H2d) dimensions will play as mediators in the associations between stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflicts and nurses’ psychological and relational health conditions.

Finally, considering the well-demonstrated protective role of work-resources [ 9 , 17 ] and, in particular, the moderating role of perceived control [ 57 , 58 ], organizational support [ 59 , 60 , 61 ], and job satisfaction [ 62 , 63 ], the following hypothesis was tested:

Hypothesis three (H3)– Moderating Effects . Perceived Work-Resources, namely Job Control (H3a), Social Support (H3b), and Job Satisfaction (H3c) will significantly moderate/buffer the relationships between perceived stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflicts and, respectively, work-family inter-role conflicts, work-related stress, and psychological and relational health conditions. In addition, Work-Resources will also significantly moderate/buffer the relationships between, respectively, work-family inter-role conflicts and work-related stress with psychological and relational health conditions.

Materials and methods

The present cross-sectional multi-centre study was carried out in a sample of 265 nurses, recruited from Italian Hospitals of the Public Health Service between January and August 2023. The STROBE Checklist was used to report this study. Chairpersons and– where available– Nursing Managers were contacted to ask for the permission for administering a questionnaire to the nursing staff (in-presence administration, with a trained psychologist always available to respond to any doubt/queries). Afterwards, nurses were directly contacted and given all the information about the research objective as well as about the confidentiality of the data collection procedure. To be included, participants need to be nurses working in Public Health Service (i.e., high-specialized hospital, academic hospital, general hospital). Those nurses working in private settings were not covered in the present study. The study was performed in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards, and it was approved by the Ethics Committee of Psychological Research of University of Naples Federico II. A total of 265 out of 300 nurses agreed to participate in the study, provided the informed consent, and completed the questionnaire in all its section (Response Rate = 88.3%). There were no missing data. Overall, the sample is representative of the diverse nursing workforce for sex and age. Indeed, 39.6% ( n  = 105) were men, 60.7% ( n  = 160) were women, and the ages ranged from 21 to 65 years ( M  = 44.3, SD  = 10.0).

The questionnaire included a section for registering nurses’ background information, along with validated measures for the assessment of perceived stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflicts, work-family inter-role conflicts, work-related stress, work-resources, and psychological and relational health conditions.

Stressors in nursing-interpersonal conflicts

Perceived stress linked to interpersonal conflicts was assessed by using the Expanded Nursing Stress Scale (ENSS) [ 45 ], which consists of 57 items on a 5-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = “never stressful” to 4 = “extremely stressful”, with 0 = “does not apply”) and divided into nine subscales, namely Death and Dying, Inadequate Emotional Preparation, Discrimination, Uncertainty Concerning Treatments, Workload, Conflicts with Physicians, Conflicts with Peers, Conflicts with Supervisors, Patients and their Families. In line with our research objectives, four subscales out of nine of the ENSS were used, namely Conflicts with Physicians (5 items, e.g., “Criticism by a physician”); Conflicts with Peers (6 items; e.g., “Difficulty with another nurse in immediate work setting”); Conflicts with Supervisors (7 items, e.g., “Criticisms by a supervisor”); and Patients and their Families (8 items, e.g., “Dealing with abusive patients”). In the present study, Cronbach’s α and McDonald’s ω values were satisfactory (Supplementary Table 1 ).

Work-family inter-role conflicts

Perceived work–family inter-role conflicts were assessed by using the Work–Family Conflict and Family–Work Conflict Scales (WFC and FWC) [ 64 , 65 ]. Each scale (WFC; e.g., “My job produces strain that makes it difficult to fulfil family duties”; FWC, e.g., “The demands of my family or spouse/partner interfere with work-related activities”) consists of 5 items on a 7-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = “Strongly disagree” to 7 = “Strongly agree”). In this study, Cronbach’s α and McDonald’s ω values were satisfactory (Supplementary Table 1 ).

• Work-related stress

Perceived work-related stress was assessed by using the Effort-Reward Imbalance Test (ERI Test) [ 13 , 66 ], which consists of 17 items on a 5-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = “Disagree” to 5 = “Agree, and I am very distressed”) divided into three subscales, namely Effort (6 items, e.g., “Over the past few years, my job has become more and more demanding”), Material Reward (7 items, e.g., “Considering all my efforts and achievement, my salary/income is adequate”) and Esteem Reward (4 items, e.g., “I received the respect I deserve from my superiors”). In line with the ERI Model [ 13 ], in the present study, we have adopted the Effort-Reward Imbalance (ERI) ratio, which represents the ratio of perceived Effort (numerator) and perceived Rewards (denominator). ERI ratio can be calculated by using the following formula i.e., Effort score/Total Rewards score multiplied by a correction factor derived from the difference in the number of items for Effort and Rewards. ERI ratio increases with increasing values of the ratio, with cut-off score of 1 (ERI ratio > 1) indicating high levels of perceived imbalance [ 13 , 67 ]. In the present study, Cronbach’s α and McDonald’s ω values for Effort and Total Reward scales were satisfactory (Supplementary Table 1 ).

Work-resources

Perceived work resources were assessed by using the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) [ 14 ] and the Job Satisfaction Subscale from the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ) [ 68 ].

The Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) [ 14 ] consists of 27 items on a four-point Likert scale (ranging from 0 = “Often” to 3 = “Never”) divided into three subscales, namely Job Demands, Job Control, and Social Support. In the present study, we used the two subscales of job control (14 items, e.g., “Do you have a choice in deciding how you do your work?”), and social support (4 items, e.g., “How often do you get help and support from your immediate superior?”). The Job Satisfaction subscale from the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ) [ 68 ] consists of four items on a 4-point Likert scale (ranging from 0 = “Highly unsatisfied” to 3 = “Very satisfied”), covering perceived satisfaction in the form of working conditions, perspectives and usage of abilities (4 items, e.g., Regarding your work in general, how pleased are you with your work prospects?). In the present study, Cronbach’s α and McDonald’s ω values for all Work-Resources were satisfactory (Supplementary Table 1 ).

Psychological and relational health conditions

Perceived levels of psychological and relational health conditions were assessed by using the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R) [ 69 , 70 ], which consists of 90 items on a five-point Likert scale (ranging from 0 = “Not at all” to 4 = “Extremely”), and divided into nine subscales, namely Anxiety, Phobic-Anxiety, Obsessive–Compulsive, Somatization, Depression, Interpersonal-Sensitivity, Hostility, Psychoticism, and Paranoid Ideation. In line with our research objectives, four subscales out of nine of the SCL-90-R were used, namely Anxiety (10 items, e.g., “Tense or keyed up”), Depression (13 items, e.g., “Hopeless about future”), Somatization (12 items, e.g., “Feeling weak”), Interpersonal-Sensitivity (9 items, e.g., “Feeling that people are unfriendly or dislike you”), and Hostility (6 items, e.g., “Having urges to break or smash things”). Additionally, in order to identify nurses reporting clinically relevant levels of symptoms, scores were also converted into percentages by using the cut-off points provided in the Italian validation study [ 70 ] according to age (adults) and to sex (i.e., Anxiety: cut-off men = 0.91, women = 1.31; Depression: cut-off men = 1.08, women = 1.62; Somatization: cut-off men = 1.09, women = 1.67; Interpersonal-Sensitivity: cut-off men = 1.01, women = 1.34; Hostility: cut-off men = 1.18, women = 1.34).

Data analysis

All the statistical analyses were carried out by using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS; Version 21). Firstly, descriptive statistics of study variables were carried out, and frequencies and percentages of nurses reporting clinically relevant levels of symptoms of Anxiety, Depression, Somatization, Interpersonal-Sensitivity, and Hostility were calculated by using the cut-off scores provided by the Italian validation study of the SCL-90-R [ 70 ]. Moreover, preliminary to mediating and moderating hypotheses testing, Correlational Analyses (i.e., Pearson’s correlations among all study variables) were undertaken to explore correlations between, respectively, stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflicts, inter-role conflicts and work-related stress dimensions with psychological and relational health outcomes (H1), as well as to evaluate the feasibility of the testing of mediating (H2) and moderating hypotheses (H3). Furthermore, to judge the normality of data, the distribution of variables was explored by calculating Skewness ( range − 2 to + 2) and Kurtosis values ( range − 7 to + 7) (i.e., Skewness = 2 and kurtosis = 7 considered to be a violation of normality) [ 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 ].

Therefore, in order to test mediating (H2) and moderating (H3) hypotheses, Hayes’ PROCESS tool was used (Model 4 for mediation analyses and Model 1 for moderation analyses) [ 75 ]. For analysing and reporting direct and indirect (mediation) analyses, bias-corrected bootstrapped test with 5,000 replications to ensure the 95% Confidence Interval (Confident Interval with the lower and the upper bounds either both positive or both negative) were used to verify the significance of the effects [ 75 ], while the Z Sobel test was used to ensure the significance of indirect effects ( Z  > 1.96, p  <.05). For analysing and reporting moderation analyses, the statistical significance of interaction effects was examined ( p  <.05), the delta R-sq values (ΔR 2 ) were reported to display that the inclusion of the interaction terms resulted in a statistically significant increase in the variance explained in the outcomes. Finally, simple slopes were plotted to graphically display moderating effects. The Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) and tolerance values were also used for diagnosing multicollinearity, using VIF < 5 and tolerance > 0.40 as cut-off points [ 76 , 77 ].

Preliminary analyses

With respect to psychological and relational health conditions, data showed that 18.5% ( n  = 49) of nurses reported clinically relevant levels of Somatization, 15.5% ( n  = 41) clinical levels of Depression, and 14.0% ( n  = 37) reported clinical levels of Anxiety. Moreover, 18.1% ( n  = 48) of nurses reported clinical levels of Interpersonal-Sensitivity and 11.7% ( n  = 31) showed clinical levels of Hostility.

Hypothesis one (H1)– main effects

Table  1 shows means, standard deviations and inter-correlations among study variables.

Data fully supported H1, revealing that stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflict (H1a), inter-role conflicts (H1b) and work-related stress dimensions (H1c) were all significantly positively related to all psychological and relational health outcomes investigated.

Furthermore, all the statistically significant correlations among the study variables provided adequate evidence supporting the mediating and moderating hypotheses testing. Specifically, data firstly revealed that stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflict were significantly positively related to the hypothesised mediators, namely work-related stress and inter-role conflict dimensions, i.e., Conflicts with Physicians was significantly positively related to both Work-Family Conflict ( WFC ) and Family-Work Conflict ( FWC ), Conflicts with Peers and Patients and their Families were significantly positively related to WFC , while Conflicts with Supervisors was significantly positively related to Effort-Reward Imbalance ( ERI ) and to WFC .

Moreover, significant correlations between, respectively, stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflict, work-related stress and inter-role conflict dimensions with the hypothesised moderators (work-resources) were found, i.e., Job Control significantly negatively related to ERI , WFC , and FWC; Social Support significantly negatively related to ERI ; Job Satisfaction significantly negatively related to Conflicts with Supervisors and to ERI . Additionally, work-resources were also found significantly negatively related to psychological and relational health outcomes.

Furthermore, Skewness values fall within the range of -2 to + 2 (i.e., Skewness values ranged from − 0.44 to + 1.84) and Kurtosis values fall within the range of -7 to + 7 (i.e., Kurtosis values ranged from − 0.86 to + 4.50). Therefore, findings indicated that our data were approximately normally distributed.

Hypothesis two (H2)– mediating effects

Table  2 displays path coefficients for direct and indirect effects of interpersonal conflicts-stressors in nursing, work-related stress, and work-family inter-role conflicts on psychological and relational health outcomes.

Specifically, data revealed that all the stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflicts were able to significantly exacerbate perceived levels of WFC (H2a). while only Conflicts with Supervisors was able to significantly exacerbate perceived levels of ERI (H2b).

Also, overall data supported the mediating role of ERI and of WFC – yet no evidence were provided for the mediating role of FWC . In particular, data revealed that WFC (H2c) played as a statistically significant mediator in the associations between all stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflicts and, respectively Anxiety, Depression and Somatization. Furthermore, WFC also played as statistically significant mediator in the association between the stressor linked to interpersonal conflicts with Patients and Their Families and Hostility (Fig.  2 ).

Summary: the mediating role of Work-Family Conflict. Note. Mediating variables are displayed in italics; Health outcomes are displayed in capital. Symbols (+) indicate the directions of the associations

Moreover, data revealed that ERI (H2d) played as a statistically significant mediator in the associations between Conflicts with Supervisors and, respectively, Anxiety, Depression, Interpersonal-Sensitivity, and Hostility (Fig.  3 ). Additionally, when checking for multicollinearity, the Variance Inflation Factors (VIFs) values for the models tested were all < 5 ( range 1.02 to 1.07) and the tolerance values were all > 0.40 ( range 0.93 to 0.97), supporting the significant role of all the dimensions considered.

Summary: the mediating role of Effort-Reward Imbalance. Note. Mediating variables are displayed in italics; Health outcomes are displayed in capital. Symbols (+) indicate the directions of the associations

Hypothesis three (H3)– moderating effects

Data fully supported the significant moderating role of all Work Resources (H3), also highlighting some specificities.

Firstly, data revealed the statistically significant moderating effect of perceived Job Control (H3a), specifically in the associations between Conflicts with Supervisors and ERI (Conflicts with Supervisors × Job Control against ERI: ΔR 2  = 0.060, t = -4.17, p  =.000), as well as in the associations between ERI and, respectively, Anxiety (ERI × Job Control against Anxiety: ΔR 2  = 0.020, t = -2.65, p  =.008), Depression (ERI × Job Control against Depression: ΔR 2  = 0.024, t = -2.98, p  =.003), Somatization (ERI × Job Control against Somatization: ΔR 2  = 0.016, t = -2.27, p  =.024), and Hostility (ERI × Job Control against Hostility: ΔR 2  = 0.063, t = -4.65, p  =.000) (Fig.  4 ).

The moderating role of Job Control. Note. The moderating role of Job Control in the associations between Conflicts With Supervisors and Effort-Reward Imbalance (a) , and in the associations between Effort-Reward Imbalance and Anxiety (b) , Depression (c) , Somatization (d) , and Hostility (e)

Secondly, data supported the statistically significant moderating effect of perceived Social Support (H3b), specifically in the associations between Conflicts with Peers and, respectively, WFC (Conflicts with Peers × Social Support against Work-Family Conflict: ΔR 2  = 0.080, t = -2.86, p  =.004) and Somatization (Conflicts with Peers × Social Support against Somatization: ΔR 2  = 0.015, t = -2.03, p  =.043) (Fig.  5 ).

The moderating role of Social Support. Note. The moderating role of Social Support in the associations between Conflicts with Peers and, respectively, Work-Family Conflict (a) and Somatization (b)

Finally, data highlighted the statistically significant moderating role of Job Satisfaction (H3c). Specifically, data revealed the moderating role of Job Satisfaction in the associations between Conflicts With Supervisors and ERI (Conflict With Supervisors × Job Satisfaction against ERI: ΔR2 = 0.057, t = -4.07, p  =.000), as well as in the associations between ERI and, respectively, Anxiety (ERI × Job Satisfaction against Anxiety: ΔR 2  = 0.036, t = -3.40, p  =.000), Depression (ERI × Job Satisfaction against Depression: ΔR 2  = 0.046, t = -3.85, p  =.000), Interpersonal-Sensitivity (ERI × Job Satisfaction against Interpersonal-Sensitivity: ΔR 2  = 0.026, t = -2.76, p  =.006), and Hostility (ERI × Job Satisfaction against Hostility: ΔR 2  = 0.038, t = -3.45, p  =.000) (Fig.  6 ).

The moderating role of Job Satisfaction. Note. The moderating role of Job Satisfaction in the associations between Conflicts with Supervisors and Effort-Reward Imbalance (a) and in the associations between Effort-Reward Imbalance and Anxiety (b) , Depression (c) , Interpersonal-Sensitivity (d) , and Hostility (e)

Furthermore, Job Satisfaction was found able to also significantly moderate the associations between Conflicts with Physicians and Anxiety (Conflicts with Physicians × Job Satisfaction against Anxiety: ΔR 2  = 0.018, t = -2.30, p  =.021), as well as the associations between WFC and, respectively, Anxiety (Work-Family Conflict × Job Satisfaction against Anxiety: ΔR 2  = 0.023, t = -2.62, p  =.009), Depression (Work-Family Conflict × Job Satisfaction against Depression: ΔR 2  = 0.024, t = -2.66, p  =.008), and Hostility (Work-Family Conflict × Job Satisfaction against Hostility: ΔR 2  = 0.021, t = -2.41, p  =.016) (Fig.  7 ).

The moderating role of Job Satisfaction. Note. The moderating role of Job Satisfaction in the associations between Conflicts with Physicians and Anxiety (a) and in the associations between Work-Family Conflict and Anxiety (b) , Depression (c) , and Hostility (d)

No other significant moderating effects were found. Additionally, the Variance Inflation Factors (VIFs) values for the models tested were all < 5 ( range 1.00 to 1.04) and the tolerance values were all > 0.40 ( range 0.96 to 0.99), supporting the significant role of all the dimensions considered.

The present study proposed a research application of the DRIVE-Nurses Model [ 9 ] with the aim of responding to the need to go in-depth into the complex and dynamic interplay between stress, conflict and psychological/relational health conditions among nurses. This while acknowledging, at the same time, the reciprocity of nurses’ experiences within and outside the wards.

Firstly, findings highlighted alarming levels of psychological suffering among sampled nurses, given the relevant number of nursing staff overwhelming the clinical cut-off scores for symptoms of Somatization (18.5%), Depression (15.5%), and Anxiety (14.0%). Moreover, data suggested the presence of relevant levels of relational suffering, given the number of nurses overwhelming the clinical cut-off scores for symptoms of Hostility (11.7%) and, even more, for Interpersonal-Sensitivity (18.1%), the latter featured by negative expectations concerning relationships, perceived low esteem from others, low self-evaluation, and sense of inferiority. These findings should be carefully considered, given that nurses’ psychological and relational discomfort may, in turn, play a role in exacerbating perceived levels of stress and in escalating interpersonal conflicts both in healthcare settings and in private life.

Accordingly, overall, findings provided initial evidence sustaining the risks of vicious circles featured by the exacerbation of work-related stress, interpersonal and inter-role conflicts, as well as psychological and relational suffering (H1). Specifically, in line with previous research [ 4 , 17 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 41 , 50 , 51 ], findings highlighted the detrimental impact of perceived stress and conflicts within the work domain and beyond the healthcare setting at the individual level, in terms of increasing symptoms of Anxiety, Depression, and Somatization. However, data also confirmed the relational risks nurses are exposed at [ 43 ], given the link between perceived stress and conflicts also with nurses’ symptoms of Hostility and Interpersonal-Sensitivity. Furthermore, our first data also sustained previous research which highlighted the need to focus not only on relationships with patients and their relatives [ 29 , 78 ], but also on the relationships with co-workers - other nurses, physicians, supervisors [ 47 , 56 , 63 ,, 79 , 80 ], which, indeed, may also represent significant sources of stress and conflict to be addressed.

However, when going in-depth into the relationships among study variable to test mediating effects, more complex interplay dynamics were found (H2). Firstly, data suggested that nurses who perceived higher levels of stress linked to conflicts with physicians, supervisors and peers, along with those who perceived stress in the relationships with patients and their families were likely to report escalating perceived inter-role conflict, in terms of work-family conflict - yet not in terms of family-work conflict. These results supported previous research highlighting the ability of experiences in workplace (conflict/violence) to crossover the work domain [ 15 , 16 ], exacerbating conflict and suffering nurses may experience in private life [ 4 , 53 ].

Nevertheless, the non-significance of the associations between stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflict and family-work conflict (i.e., family interfering with work) seems suggesting that work life is able to interfere with private life to a greater extent than viceversa . This could be linked to the inherent characteristic of nursing profession, which is indeed a “shift work”, so that nurses may be used to plan/schedule their private life based on their work-shift to a greater extent than viceversa . However, overall, these findings supported the meaningful to develop interventions, programmes and campaigns promoting psychological/relational health among healthcare staff by starting from the workplaces, yet potentially having a positive impact also on nurses’ private life.

Moreover, data also enlightened the significant mediating role of work-family conflict, with all stressors in nursing linked to interpersonal conflicts having an impact in terms of increasing anxiety, depression, and somatization also through the exacerbation of perceived inter-role conflict. However, a tailored attention should be given to perceived stress linked to problems and conflicts in the relationships with patients and their families. Indeed, data suggested a specific spiral effect of stress and conflict, in which the interplay between perceived stress linked to conflict with patients/their family and work-family conflict have a detrimental impact increasing nurses’ symptoms of hostility. In other words, data may highlight a vicious circle in which the anger and the frustration experienced in the relationship with “clients” may exacerbate the anger and the frustration experienced outside the wards, and these dynamics may significantly impair and deplete nurses’ relational skills, making more likely the possibility of emergencies of conflicts as well as their escalation in both work and life domains.

However, when considering stress linked to perceived effort-reward imbalance, our data highlighted that only the relationships with supervisors [ 47 , 56 , 81 ] may play a pivotal role in exacerbating perceived mismatch between high efforts spent at work and low rewards (esteem and material) received at work, determining individual and relational disease. These findings provided further evidence endorsing the idea of perceived workplace conflicts being able to exacerbate perceived levels of work-related stress [ 33 , 54 , 55 , 56 ], yet also added tailored information on those actors/relationships– in such case with supervisors - that should be carefully considered when defining interventions reducing perceived effort-reward imbalance and promoting occupational health among nurses.

In this direction, when testing for the moderating effects, findings allowed the identification of specific moderating variables (i.e., job control; social support; job satisfaction) that should be targeted and promoted within interventions, as they were able to significantly buffer the negative impact of nearly all sources of stress and conflicts (all but patients and their families), potentially breaking the abovementioned vicious circles. In particular, in line with research supporting the significant role of perceived job control as key resources within work domains [ 57 , 58 ], data revealed that perceived Job Control (perceived skill discretion and decision authority) was able not only to prevent perceived Conflicts with Supervisors from exacerbating perceived Effort-Reward Imbalance, but also to reduce the risk of individual and relational suffering.

Differently, perceived Social Support was found able to significantly prevent Conflicts with peers from cross-overing the wards, exacerbating nurses’ perceived levels of Work-Family Conflict and increasing psychophysical disease. These latter findings were in line with research highlighting the meaningful role of support within work-context [ 59 , 60 , 61 ], but also provided further evidence supporting how this important resource may promote high-quality relationships among co-workers.

Last, but not least, data highlighted the pivotal moderating role of Job Satisfaction [ 62 , 63 ], which was found able to significantly buffer the negative impact of Conflicts with Supervisors and Conflicts with Physicians , along with the negative impact of ERI and WFC on psychological and relational health conditions. These data emphasised the need to carefully assess and promote self-accomplishment, which, indeed, may undoubtedly drive the conditions fostering greater work life and even general life experiences.

In conclusion, whereas perceived stress and conflicts are parts of everyday life in the workplace and in the private domains, our findings demonstrated how they can escalate and result in vicious circles exacerbating not only individual suffering (anxiety, depression, somatization), but also relational disease, with increasing interpersonal sensitivity and hostility undermining the quality of all relations within and outside the workplace. Nonetheless, our data also suggested that providing and fostering work resources such job control, social support, and– above all– job satisfaction can effectively break these vicious circles, so promoting individual and relational wellbeing among nurses.

Despite its merits, the study has some limitations that should be addressed. Firstly, one limitation is the cross-sectional design, so that data can only provide a temporary picture of these complex dynamics, causality cannot be conclusively determined, nor can the direction of effects be established. A longitudinal design would provide stronger evidence for the unveiled dynamics and would allow suggesting cause-effect/temporal relationships between predictors and outcomes. Therefore, future research is recommended to be developed with a longitudinal design - so assessing and monitoring psychological and relational health conditions within the wards over time - yet also intervention studies should be considered. Indeed, new findings of such research design (assessing study variables pre-to-post interventions) could provide direct evidence of how changes in perceived stressors and resources may affect psychological and relational health outcomes. This would give further and tailored indications to be used by the hospital management in designing evidence-based programs and interventions. Secondly, data relies on participants’ self-reports; therefore, findings could be affected by the risk of social desirability bias as well by the underestimation/overestimation of perceived stress and conflicts by nurses. Indeed, despite we have focused on perceived conflicts rather than on episodes of violence to reduce the perceived stigma of victimization (i.e., shame, fear of judgement, blame/non-supportive environment) and fear of consequences for their selves [ 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 ], we cannot guarantee that interpersonal conflicts were underestimated and believed as not enough serious be reported. In line with this, further research could also be designed to include a wider range of sources of data. Specifically, the collection of qualitative data could enrich the understanding of the nuanced experiences of nurses dealing with stress and conflicts, also providing further evidence of how they perceive the support and resources available to them. Thirdly, although findings could be of international interest, the study offered original evidence on nurses working in the Italian healthcare context. Therefore, future studies could be developed with a cross-cultural design to test the generalizability of our results. In the same direction, future research could consider the inclusion of further factors that could be able to break vicious circles, in particular considering that our data provided evidence for the moderating role of work-resources in counteracting the negative impact of all detrimental factors but Patients and Their Families . From this perspective, our results do not fully align with previous research supporting the moderating role of work resources, in particular social support, in the context of workplace violence against/between nurses. However, to the best of our knowledge, research testing the potential role of moderating variables in this context is still scarce, and there is still lack of consensus in the measurement tools used for assessing conflict/violence, work-resources, and outcomes. Accordingly, whereas this discrepancy could be the result of several factors, including cultural differences and specificities of the Italian healthcare system, this could be also due to the different ways the topic– of international interest– has been treated in research (i.e., differences in study variables and measures used) [ 34 ]. For example, there are several ways/tools in the literature to assess perceptions of violence/conflict by distinguishing perpetrators (e.g., internal/external violence [ 59 ], users’ violence [ 63 ]), but the topic is also explored by assessing the frequency of experiences of physical/psychological violence at work beyond perpetrators [ 61 ]. Also, some studies targeting workplace conflict/violence have provided evidence supporting the moderating role of work resources concerning outcomes such as perceived job insecurity [ 57 ] and turnover intentions [ 59 , 60 , 62 ]. Other research in the field explored psychological wellbeing as the outcome, yet they considered psychological outcomes and tools that varied from those adopted in the present study (e.g., emotional well-being, fear of future violence at work, job-related affect [ 61 ], burnout [ 62 , 63 ]). Further evidence and comparative research in the field, mainly those exploring mediating/moderating effects, are therefore needed to shed light on and endorse this initial evidence on vicious and virtuous circles.

However, despite these limitations, our data unveiled the risk of a vicious circles of stress, conflicts and violence, extremely harmful for nurses’ wellbeing, since increasing anger and frustration, exacerbating negative interactions, communication gaps, and the risk of reporting poor mental health. Therefore, helping and improving a virtuous relational approach, developing evidence-based programmes and interventions fostering work resources and also involving supervisors, physicians, patients, and their families, should be considered one of the main goals for healthcare organizations who wish to effectively promote nurses’ wellbeing. Specifically, hospital managers and relevant stakeholders in public health could consider findings from the present study to develop and/or enhance programs for routinely assessing and monitoring perceived stress, conflicts, and psychological/relational health within the wards, so timely implementing evidence-based interventions preventing disease and suffering escalations.

With particular reference to conflicts and psychological/relational suffering (i.e., potential vicious circles), specific information and mandatory training on the relevant detrimental impact of non-physical abuses (acknowledging all the actors involved within and beyond the wards), and on the importance of reporting and seeking professional/institutional support - guaranteeing help and understanding as well as actions for the perpetrators - should be widely offered to the whole healthcare staff. The work-family spillover perspective (conflict/enrichment) should be also acknowledged and recognized (i.e., potential vicious and virtuous circles), and the healthcare staff should be offered the possibility to access psychological services within all the hospitals.

Tailored training on stress, conflicts, and ways/specific resources to be enhanced for dealing with them effectively should be also developed and offered routinely to hospital managers and the whole healthcare staff. This is also by taking into account that dealing with conflicts and stress effectively would promote a better and satisfactory work climate in the wards, resulting in high-quality performance and standards of care provided by the healthcare staff.

Data availability

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to the terms of consent to which the participants agreed but available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Abbreviations

Effort-Reward Imbalance

Demands-Resources and Individual Effects Model

Family-Work Conflict

Work-Family Conflict

WHO. Health workers. 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/occupational-health--health-workers .

WHO. Occupational Health. 2023. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/health-topics/occupational-health .

Andela M, Truchot D, Huguenotte V. Work environment and elderly abuse in nursing homes: the mediating role of burnout. J Interpers Violence. 2021;36(11–12):5709–29.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Najafi F, Fallahi-Khoshknab M, Ahmadi F, Dalvandi A, Rahgozar M. Antecedents and consequences of workplace violence against nurses: a qualitative study. J Clin Nurs. 2018;27(1– 2):e116–28.

Birgit E, Gunnevi S, Ann Ö. Work experiences among nurses and physicians in the beginning of their professional careers–analyses using the effort–reward imbalance model. Scand J Caring Sci. 2013;27(1):36–43.

Schneider A, Hering C, Peppler L, Schenk L. Effort-reward imbalance and its association with sociocultural diversity factors at work: findings from a cross-sectional survey among physicians and nurses in Germany. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2023;96(4):537–49.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Papazian L, Hraiech S, Loundou A, Herridge MS, Boyer L. High-level burnout in physicians and nurses working in adult ICUs: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Care Med. 2023;49(4):387–400.

Google Scholar  

Salyers MP, Bonfils KA, Luther L, Firmin RL, White DA, Adams EL, Rollins AL. The relationship between professional burnout and quality and safety in healthcare: a meta-analysis. J Gen Intern Med. 2017;32:475–82.

Vallone F, Smith AP, Zurlo MC. Work-related stress and wellbeing among nurses: testing a multi‐dimensional model. Jpn J Nurs Sci. 2020;17(4):e12360.

Capasso R, Zurlo MC, Smith AP. Ethnicity, work-related stress and subjective reports of health by migrant workers: a multi-dimensional model. Ethn Health. 2018; 17;23(2):174– 93.

Mark G, Smith AP. Occupational stress, job characteristics, coping, and the mental health of nurses. Brit J Health Psychol. 2012;17:505–21.

Zurlo MC, Vallone F, Smith AP. Effects of individual differences and job characteristics on the psychological health of Italian nurses. Eur J Psychol. 2018;14(1):159.

Siegrist J. Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. J Occup Health Psychol. 1996;1:27–41.

Karasek R, Brisson C, Kawakami N, Houtman I, Bongers P, Amick B. The Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ): an instrument for internationally comparative assessments of psychosocial job characteristics. J Occup Health Psychol. 1998;3(4):322.

Greenhaus JH, Powell GN. Is the opposite of positive negative? Untangling the complex relationship between work-family enrichment and conflict. Car Develop Intern. 2006;11(7):650–9.

Grzywacz JG, Marks NF. Reconceptualizing the work–family interface: an ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover between work and family J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2000;5(1):111.

Zurlo MC, Vallone F, Smith AP. Work–family conflict and psychophysical health conditions of nurses: gender differences and moderating variables. Jpn J Nurs Sci. 2020;e12324:1–12.

Shahzad A, Malik R. Workplace violence: an extensive issue for nurses in Pakistan: a qualitative investigation. J Interpers Violence. 2014;29(11):2021–34.

Warshawski S, Amit Aharon A, Itzhaki M. It takes two to tango: public attitudes toward prevention of workplace violence against health care staff: a mixed-methods study. J Interpers Violence. 2021;36(15–16):NP8724–46.

Waschgler K, Ruiz-Hernández JA, Llor-Esteban B, Jiménez-Barbero JA. Vertical and lateral workplace bullying in nursing: development of the hospital aggressive behaviour scale. J Interpers Violence. 2013;28(12):2389–412.

Bienassis K, Slawomirski L, Klazinga NS. The economics of patient safety part IV: safety in the workplace: occupational safety as the bedrock of resilient health systems. OECD Publishing. 2021.

Gressia RG, Usman S, Kamil H, Syarif H, Susanti SS. Why do nurses do not report: a qualitative study of underreported workplace violence (WPV) in emergency department (ED). Enferm Clín. 2022;32:S1–5.

Kvas A, Seljak J. Unreported workplace violence in nursing. Intern nurs rev. 2014;61(3):344–51.

Jiang L, Probst TM, Benson W, Byrd J. Voices carry: effects of verbal and physical aggression on injuries and accident reporting. Acc Anal Prev. 2018;118:190–9.

Hogarth KM, Beattie J, Morphet J. Nurses’ attitudes towards the reporting of violence in the emergency department. Aust Emerg Nurs J. 2016;19(2):75–81.

Spencer C, Sitarz J, Fouse J, DeSanto K. Nurses’ rationale for underreporting of patient and visitor perpetrated workplace violence: a systematic review. BMC Nurs. 2023;22(1):134.

Aquino K, Thau S. Workplace victimization: aggression from the target’s perspective. Annu Rev Psychol. 2009;60:717–41.

Beech B, Leather P. Workplace violence in the health care sector: a review of staff training and integration of training evaluation models. Aggress Violent Behav. 2006;11(1):27–43.

Gillespie GL, Gates DM, Miller M, Howard PK. Workplace violence in Healthcare settings: risk factors and protective strategies. Rehab Nurs. 2010;35(5):177–84.

Hershcovis MS, Turner N, Barling J, Arnold KA, Dupré KE, Inness M, LeBlanc MM, Sivanathan N. Predicting workplace aggression: a meta-analysis. J Appl Psychol. 2007;92(1):228.

Abou-ElWafa HS, El-Gilany AH, Abd-El-Raouf SE, Abd-Elmouty SM. El-Sayed Hassan El-Sayed R. Workplace violence against emergency versus non-emergency nurses in Mansoura university hospitals. Egypt J Interpers Violence. 2015;30(5):857–72.

Kafle S, Paudel S, Thapaliya A, Acharya R. Workplace violence against nurses: a narrative review. Clin Trans Res. 2022;8(5):421.

Malik OF, Sattar A, Shahzad A, Faiz R. Personal bullying and nurses’ turnover intentions in Pakistan: a mixed methods study. J Interpers Violence. 2020;35(23–24):5448.

Mento C, Silvestri MC, Bruno A, Muscatello MR, Cedro C, Pandolfo G, Zoccali RA. Workplace violence against healthcare professionals: a systematic review. Aggress Violent Behav. 2020;51:101381.

Chowdhury SR, Kabir H, Mazumder S, Akter N, Chowdhury MR, Hossain A. Workplace violence, bullying, burnout, job satisfaction and their correlation with depression among Bangladeshi nurses: a cross-sectional survey during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(9):e0274965.

Ding C, Li L, Li G, Li X, Xie L, Duan Z. Impact of workplace violence against psychological health among nurse staff from Yunnan-Myanmar Chinese border region: propensity score matching analysis. BMC Nurs. 2023;22(1):242.

Havaei F. Does the type of exposure to Workplace Violence Matter to nurses’. Mental Health? Healthc. 2021;9:41.

Zhao S, Xie F, Wang J, Shi YU, Zhang S, Han X, Sun Z, Shi L, Li Z, Mu H, Liu X. Prevalence of workplace violence against Chinese nurses and its association with mental health: a cross-sectional survey. Arch Psych nurs. 2018;32(2):242–7.

Vidal-Alves MJ, Pina D, Ruiz-Hernández JA, Puente-López E, Paniagua D, Martínez-Jarreta B. (Un) broken: lateral violence among hospital nurses, user violence, burnout, and general health: a structural equation modeling analysis. Front Med. 2022;9:1045574.

Yang LQ, Spector PE, Gallant-Roman M, Powell J. Psychosocial precursors and physical consequences of workplace violence towards nurses: a longitudinal examination with naturally occurring groups in hospital settings. Int j nurs stud. 2012;49(9):1091–102.

Sharma RK. SharmaV. Workplace violence in nursing. J Nurs Care. 2016;5:2.

Zhou ZE, Yang LQ, Spector PE. Political skill: a proactive inhibitor of workplace aggression exposure and an active buffer of the aggression-strain relationship. J Occup Health Psychol. 2015;20(4):405.

Zurlo MC, Vallone F. The spiral effect of violence and conflict on psychological and interpersonal health conditions of nurses. Dwingeloo: Kavanah; 2016. pp. 210–6.

Rashmi K, Kataria A. Work–life balance: a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. Intern J Sociol Soc Policy. 2022;42(11/12):1028–65.

French SE, Lenton R, Walters V, Eyles J. An empirical evaluation of an expanded nursing stress scale. J Nurs Meas. 2000;8(2):161–78.

Hosseini Z, Homayuni A. Personality and occupational correlates of anxiety and depression in nurses: the contribution of role conflict, core self-evaluations, negative affect and bullying. BMC Psychol. 2022;10(1):215.

Sarafis P, Rousaki E, Tsounis A, Malliarou M, Lahana L, Bamidis P, Niakas D, Papastavrou E. The impact of occupational stress on nurses’ caring behaviors and their health related quality of life. BMC Nurs. 2016;15:1–9.

Abdi F, Jahangiri M, Kamalinia M, Cousins R, Mokarami H. Developing a model for predicting safety performance of nurses based on psychosocial safety climate and role of job demands and resources, job satisfaction, and emotional exhaustion as mediators. BMC Psychol. 2023;11(1):1–3.

Dinsdale P. Heart attack risk for angry staff: study finds that nurses who do not feel adequately rewarded at work are more likely to have heart problems. Nurs Standard. 2004;19(1):9.

Fei Y, Fu W, Zhang Z, Jiang N, Yin X. The effects of effort-reward imbalance on emergency nurses’ turnover intention: the mediating role of depressive symptoms. J Clin Nurs. 2023;32(15–16):4762–70.

Gorgievski MJ, Van der Heijden BI, Bakker AB. Effort-reward imbalance and work-home interference: a two-wave study among European male nurses. Work Stress. 2019;33(4):315–33.

Sharifi A, Fallahi-Khoshknab M, Mohammadi S, Zeraati M, Jamshidi Z, Aghabeygi-Arani M, Mirzaei N, Fallahi-Khoshknab N, Rasooli P. Depression, anxiety, and stress among Iranian nurses in COVID-19 care wards. BMC Psychol. 2022;10(1):205.

Mehmood S, Husin NS, Aziz A. Do despotic leadership and workplace incivility predict turnover intention: a mediation by work-family conflict? J Interc Comm. 2023;23(2):120–35.

Magnavita N. The exploding spark: workplace violence in an infectious disease hospital- a longitudinal study. BioMed res intern; 2013.

Shahrour G, Taha I, Ali AM, Alibrahim M. The moderating role of social support on workplace violence and stress among psychiatric nurses. Nurs Forum. 2022;57(6):1281–8.

Shih FC, Yeh SC, Hsu WL. Abusive supervision and employee well-being of nursing staff: mediating role of occupational stress. J Adv Nurs. 2023;79(2):664–75.

Abuseif SF, Abdullah NA. Perception of injustice, job insecurity and workplace bullying: the moderating role of self-control. Int j acad res bus soc sci. 2015;5(12):376–84.

Rostami F, Babaei-Pouya A, Teimori-Boghsani G, Jahangirimehr A, Mehri Z, Feiz-Arefi M. Mental workload and job satisfaction in healthcare workers: the moderating role of job control. Front Public Health. 2021;9:683388.

Cakal H, Keshavarzi S, Ruhani A, Dakhil-Abbasi G. Workplace violence and turnover intentions among nurses: the moderating roles of invulnerability and organisational support–A cross‐sectional study. J Clin Nurs, 2021 Aug 12.

Courcy F, Morin AJS, Madore I. The effects of exposure to psychological violence in the workplace on commitment and turnover intentions: the moderating role of Social Support and Role stressors. J Interpers Violence. 2019;34(19):4162–90.

Schat AC, Kelloway EK. Reducing the adverse consequences of workplace aggression and violence: the buffering effects of organizational support. J Occup Health Psychol. 2003;8(2):110.

Al Sabei SD, Labrague LJ, Miner Ross A, Karkada S, Albashayreh A, Al Masroori F, Al Hashmi N. Nursing work environment, turnover intention, job burnout, and quality of care: the moderating role of job satisfaction. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2020;52(1):95–104.

Galián-Muñoz I, Ruiz-Hernández JA, Llor-Esteban B, López-García C. User violence and nursing staff burnout: the modulating role of job satisfaction. J Interpers Violence. 2016;31(2):302–15.

Colombo L, Ghislieri C. The work-to-family conflict: theories and measures. Work. 2008;15:35.

Netemeyer RG, Boles JS, McMurrian R. Development and validation of work–family conflict and family–work conflict scales. J Appl Psychol. 1996;81(4):400.

Zurlo MC, Pes D, Siegrist J. Validity and reliability of the effort-reward imbalance questionnaire in a sample of 673 Italian teachers. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2010;83:665–74.

Lau B. Effort-reward imbalance and overcommitment in employees in a Norwegian municipality: a cross sectional study. J Occup Med Toxicol. 2008;3(1):1–1.

Kristensen TS, Hannerz H, Høgh A, Borg V. The Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire-a tool for the assessment and improvement of the psychosocial work environment. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2005; 438– 49.

Derogatis LR. Symptom Checklist 90–R: administration, scoring, and procedures manual. Natl Comput Syst. 1994.

Prunas A, Sarno I, Preti E, Madeddu F. SCL-90-R. Symptom Checklist 90-R. Giunti OS. 2010.

Curran PJ, West SG, Finch JF. The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychol Methods. 1996;1(1):16.

Hair J, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis (7th Edition). Pearson Educational International. 2010.

Ryu E. Effects of skewness and kurtosis on normal-theory based maximum likelihood test statistic in multilevel structural equation modeling. Behav Res Methods. 2011;43:1066–74.

West SG, Finch JF, Curran PJ. Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: problems and remedies. In: Hoyle RH, editor. Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications. Sage; 1995.

Hayes AF. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (3rd Edition). The Guilford Press. 2017.

Allison PD. Multiple regression: a primer. Pine Forge; 1999.

Belsley DA, Kuh E, Welsch RE. Regression diagnostics: identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. Wiley; 2005.

Dehghan-Chaloshtari S, Ghodousi A. Factors and Characteristics of Workplace Violence against Nurses: a study in Iran. J Interpers Violence. 2020;35(1–2):496–509.

Rowe M, Sherlock H. Stress and verbal abuse in nursing: do burned out nurses eat their young? J Nurs Man. 2005;13(3):242–8.

Tavakol N, Molazem Z, Rakhshan M, Asemani O, Bagheri S. Moral distress in psychiatric nurses in Covid-19 crisis. BMC Psychol. 2023;11(1):1–9.

Tepper BJ. Consequences of abusive supervision. Acad Manag J. 2000;43:178.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to the chairpersons of Healthcare Services and to all nurses who participated in this study.

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Humanities, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy

Federica Vallone

Dynamic Psychology Laboratory, University of Naples Federico II, Via Rodinò 22, Naples, Italy

Maria Clelia Zurlo

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

F.V.: conceptualization, methodology, data curation, writing original draft, data analysis, M.C.Z.: conceptualization, methodology, writing review & editing, supervision. All the authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Clelia Zurlo .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The study was performed in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards, and it was approved by the Ethics Committee of Psychological Research of University of Naples Federico II (Protocol Number: 33/2019). Verbal and written informed consent was obtained from each participant prior to participating in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Vallone, F., Zurlo, M.C. Stress, interpersonal and inter-role conflicts, and psychological health conditions among nurses: vicious and virtuous circles within and beyond the wards. BMC Psychol 12 , 197 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01676-y

Download citation

Received : 18 December 2023

Accepted : 20 March 2024

Published : 10 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01676-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Interpersonal conflicts
• Inter-role conflict
• Interpersonal-sensitivity
• Psychological health

BMC Psychology

ISSN: 2050-7283

• General enquiries: [email protected]

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

Self-Efficacy, Job Satisfaction and Teacher Well-Being in the K-12 Educational System

Florica ortan.

1 The Teacher Training Department, University of Oradea, 410087 Oradea, Romania

Ciprian Simut

2 Department of Philosophy, Nelson Mandela University, Port Elizabeth 6031, South Africa; [email protected]

Ramona Simut

3 Department of Economics and Business, University of Oradea, 410087 Oradea, Romania; [email protected]

Associated Data

Data is available upon request from researchers to the corresponding author: or.aedarou@natrolf .

Teacher job satisfaction and well-being have a significant impact on educational outcomes, considering that teaching is the main objective of the educational process. The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between teacher job satisfaction and four main categories of determinants: self-efficacy, relational aspects (colleague collaboration, student behavior, school management), work-related aspects (administrative workload, teaching tasks), and working conditions, in order to identify various implications for teachers’ well-being. The study employs a survey delivered to 658 K-12 (pre-university) teachers, from the North-West region of Romania. We used factorial analysis and a structural equation model to test eight proposed hypotheses. The results showed that self-efficacy, promotion, positive student behavior, and working conditions have significant effects on job satisfaction. These factors influence job satisfaction and well-being in the teaching profession because they ensure a positive work environment in which teachers and students thrive, thus leading to higher levels of involvement from teachers, students, and parents alike. An efficient work environment decreases attrition, burnout, emotional exhaustion, and teacher turnover, while increasing job satisfaction, well-being, and teacher retention.

1. Introduction

The Romanian educational system is highly controversial, bureaucratic, and unstable. In the last three decades, a series of modifications have been implemented in the system, under the guise of reform, which never seem to achieve their proposed goals. In the last decade, controversy broke out regarding poor student results, visible in their periodic examinations and at the baccalaureate. The issue put even greater pressure on teachers’ qualifications and their efficiency in class, drawing public reproach to a profession which had to deal with constantly limited funding; a situation which does not seem to change, regardless of the political color of the education ministers. Under-financing has disastrous consequences for the entire educational system [ 1 ]. One of the recent controversies revolved around the poor results that Romanian students obtained on the PISA tests [ 2 ]. The situation maintains constant pressure and media outrage directed at the efficiency of teachers. The most recent educational reform centers on the Educated Romanian program, which has come under serious scrutiny due to its lack of substance and institutional delays. The system is also plagued by frequent curriculum changes that are not in tune with market demands, and a high number of blocked teaching positions result in teachers being unable to advance professionally [ 1 ].

There is an important difference that must be noted between the general term “well-being” and the term “occupational well-being”. Well-being can be defined, as McCallum and Price [ 3 ] point out, as being diverse and fluid but connected to individual, family, and community beliefs and values. It is also constructed around culture, opportunities, and temporal contexts. In essence, they argue, general well-being is about positive notions, but is unique to every individual, providing a sense of identity and demanding respect. The definition given by van Horn et al. [ 4 ] is that occupational well-being is “the positive evaluation of various aspects of one’s job, including affective, motivational, behavioral, cognitive, and psychosomatic dimensions”. Occupational well-being is connected to work engagement and career choice satisfaction, as Matteucci et al. [ 5 ] observe, and it is strongly dependent on emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction. On a more specific note, Acton and Glasgow [ 6 ] defined teacher well-being as “an individual sense of personal professional fulfilment, satisfaction, purposefulness and happiness, constructed in a collaborative process with colleagues and students”. This article will use the definitions of occupational and teacher well-being, written simply as “well-being”, and not as “occupational well-being” or “teacher well-being”.

Zoller and Bacskai analyze fundamental aspects of job satisfaction in the Romanian educational system, namely, job satisfaction, self-efficacy, and school climate, concluding that job satisfaction, in Romanian lower secondary education, is dependent on professional development, a disciplined atmosphere, teacher–student relationships, and stakeholder relations [ 7 ]. Despite various issues, teachers’ job satisfaction and well-being depend on relationships; therefore, policy makers might consider the impact of their implemented policies on school climates. In this context, teacher job satisfaction and well-being are aspects that need to be studied, to generate genuine change in the educational system [ 8 ]. Furthermore, despite the systemic issues, both job satisfaction and well-being are strongly related to school management, which can create the proper working environment for the two elements to improve. Besides the management aspect of the issue, teachers deal with two more fundamental elements: relations with students, colleagues, and parents, and professional advancement [ 9 , 10 ].

In the pre-university system, job satisfaction is strongly related to job experience and professional development. It seems that younger teachers, who are at the beginning of their professional career, have higher levels of job satisfaction than older, more experienced teachers. However, the younger teachers are also more prone to leave the profession, compared to the older teachers. On the same note, job security, through tenure [ 11 ], provides increased job satisfaction to older, more experienced teachers, whereas younger teachers who do not have tenure show lower levels of job satisfaction [ 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 ]. Despite the negative aspects, the teaching profession still holds prestige, and personal and social value [ 17 ]. The symbolic capital of the teaching profession increases social status, which leads to an increase in support for certain schools where power of decision, work style, personal independence, intelligence level, and teaching abilities are visibly promoted [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ].

The tipping point of the balance between teacher job satisfaction, well-being, and the school environment, is related to how efficient school management is in reducing bureaucracy and allowing teachers to focus on teaching and building meaningful relationships with other colleagues and with students, rather than having to carry unnecessary additional workload [ 19 ].

The present study aims to explore and analyze the factors that influence job satisfaction among K-12 teachers, based on the identified relationships between the factors and job satisfaction, in order to offer solutions and proposals to improve well-being for Romanian teachers. To achieve this goal, a questionnaire survey was used for the collection of statistical data and a factorial analysis was conducted to compute the indexes for our study. This paper is organized as follows: (1) Introduction; (1.1.) Literature Review (with an overview of specialized literature regarding the job satisfaction and well-being, and a presentation of the purpose and the objectives of the study); (1.2.) Research Hypotheses (with a description of hypothetical relations); (2) Materials and Methods (with a research method, a respondent’s profile and the conceptual model); (3) Results; (4) Discussion and Practical Implications; (5) Conclusions.

1.1. Literature Review

The specialized literature on job satisfaction reveals that it is an integral part of any industry or work environment. In the case of health workers, it was found that ethical leadership positively and significantly influences job satisfaction, by: applying ethical principles to problem-solving and equity [ 24 ]; offering training and organizational support [ 25 ] together with management support and resources, despite tendencies to quit the job [ 26 ]; offering psychological support despite difficult working conditions [ 27 ]; prompting risk prevention plans [ 28 ]; offering improved health maintenance programs [ 29 ]. In all the previously mentioned sources, well-being was either positively or negatively affected by management decisions. In the case of Japan’s civil servants’ sector, job satisfaction was influenced by satisfaction with job interest, skills, and how abilities were used, while satisfaction with how a section was run, co-workers, work prospects, physical working conditions, and payment had a lower influence [ 30 ]. For workers in other sectors of industry that are considered hazardous, such as Turkish jean sandblasting workers, dock workers, factory workers, and miners, lack of skills lead to low wages and almost no insurance or health care, and hence a high risk of stress and low job satisfaction levels. Sandblasting and dock workers reported the lowest satisfaction level. Despite the hazardous nature of their jobs, miners showed higher levels of job satisfaction than other workers [ 31 ]. In the case of Filipina migrant domestic workers in Hong Kong, migration itself was a source of high stress. In this case, salary was the most important determinant of job satisfaction, since this was the main reason for migrating, overtaking the usual factors that are important for job satisfaction such as educational level, previous occupations, and even personal aspirations [ 32 ]. Carvajal et al. [ 33 ] investigated how gender and age variations impacted job satisfaction in the case of pharmacists in the US. They found that female pharmacists were consistently more satisfied with their jobs than their male counterparts when age was controlled for. During our research, it was observed that job satisfaction is studied mainly among high-profile jobs such as health workers, and to a lesser degree in other industries. Considering other industries, we aimed at presenting a general perspective that would show similarities and differences between various types of jobs and teaching.

Job satisfaction has received great attention in the past century [ 34 ]. The most cited definition was given by Locke [ 35 ], who defined it in terms of the positive appreciation of one’s own job, which generates a positive emotional state, meaning that job values are fulfilled. In a later article, Henne and Locke [ 36 ] elaborated on the nature of job satisfaction, presenting it in relation to the work itself, which needs to be personally interesting and significant, successful, and able to generate accomplishment, progress, growth, responsibility, autonomy, role clarity, role congruence, (lack of role conflict), feedback about performance, and a lack of physical strain. As Ho and Au suggested, in teaching, job satisfaction is the relation between what a teacher wants from the profession and what the teacher perceives it as giving or entailing, resulting in a product that stems from attitudinal and affective responses [ 37 ]. On the issue of the development and analysis of job satisfaction, Zhu offers an encompassing perspective [ 38 ].

Toropova et al. [ 39 ] make a series of important claims arguing that, in the case of job satisfaction, there have been important findings that show a significant association between job satisfaction and the factors studied in this article, such as working conditions, collegiality, workload, and student behavior. Gender is also related to job satisfaction, as women teachers have more self-efficacy, engage more in professional development, and thus have higher levels of job satisfaction, whereas men tend to focus more on collegiality/cooperation. On the same note, teachers with lower self-efficacy tend to have more issues with student discipline and behavior. The wider context shows that schools where there is higher leadership/management support, where student discipline is respected, and where teachers have higher levels of decision-making and autonomy tend to have better teacher retention [ 39 ]. From the same perspective, Plopeanu et al. [ 40 ] suggest that job satisfaction is made up of personality characteristics and behavior, intrinsic and extrinsic values, work situation, life satisfaction, and social influence, which makes it increasingly difficult to study because teachers interact with one another, adapt to various working conditions, and develop in their careers through development programs. In this context, it is important to draw a distinction between two dimensions of factors that make up job satisfaction, namely, extrinsic and intrinsic dimensions. The intrinsic factors of job satisfaction refer to achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, growth, and the work itself. The extrinsic factors refer to supervision, working conditions, co-workers, pay policies, procedures, status, and personal life. In this research, we considered both extrinsic and intrinsic factors, therefore retaining the general formulation of “job satisfaction”.

Well-being is notoriously difficult to define and there is no consensus on what the construct of the concept should be. Despite the difficulties, it has been suggested that it could be split into objective well-being (measurable elements: economic resources, political circumstances, physical health conditions, number of social relationships, literacy) and subjective well-being (subjective experiences: happiness, emotions, engagement, purpose, life satisfaction, quality of social relationships, competence, accomplishment) [ 41 ]. As health is not merely the absence of disease or infirmity, well-being is part of health [ 42 ]. In the field of education, subjective well-being is considered most frequently [ 43 ]. Considering the fact that the present research was performed in a European context, where well-being revolves around individual achievement and self-esteem [ 44 ], the definition of Acton and Glasgow [ 6 ] was proposed, which describes well-being as an “individual sense of personal professional fulfillment, satisfaction, purposefulness and happiness, constructed in a collaborative process with colleagues and students”. In essence, there is no fixed definition of well-being; instead, it must be considered to be dependent on relationships, specific situations, productivity, and the ability and willingness to engage in various life experiences [ 45 ]. Considering the definitions provided for both teacher and professional well-being and job satisfaction applied to teaching, the former includes the latter, meaning that well-being revolves around cognitive and emotional factors more than job satisfaction. Elements such as happiness and purposefulness make well-being different from job satisfaction, which is more pragmatic, revolving around the direct exchange between one’s skills and their appreciation, and the results within the workplace. The research aims at analyzing the factors that contribute to job satisfaction in the K-12 Romanian system and providing a means to identify the impact on teacher well-being.

In other occupations such as fishing, where gender is an issue to be considered together with household care [ 46 ], mining, where there is no impact on family life but a significant impact on the environment, which in turn may affect well-being [ 47 ], and casinos, where job satisfaction is low due to inherent job requirements such as unsocial hours and limited promotion, issues cannot be addressed by management since they are inherent to the industry [ 48 ]. In other situations, such as among migrants, depending on the context, job satisfaction and well-being depend on factors such as cultural background, religiosity, and working conditions, especially when work-related abuse is discovered [ 49 ]. For self-employed workers, [ 50 ] and manufacturers, who focus more on health [ 51 ], job satisfaction is influenced by motivation, performance, job retention, working environment, on-job behavior, and most of all on time management decisions and policies. Well-being is a result of these various factors, which when favorable, tend to offer employee satisfaction, self-worth, and a sense of belonging. Well-being, objective or subjective, is difficult to define, but it considers evaluative or cognitive (general life satisfaction), eudemonic (life purpose), and emotional (happiness, joy, sadness, worry) dimensions, becoming more important at a national level, since it benefits society [ 52 ] at a local, as well as a global level [ 53 ].

Job satisfaction is also studied in the field of education. Several research papers focus on the determinants of job satisfaction, such as school organization climate [ 39 , 54 ], self-efficacy [ 39 , 55 ], teacher mobility [ 9 , 56 ], workload, commitment, morale [ 57 ], and participation in decision-making [ 58 ]. The objective of this study was to identity four main determinants, with several sub-determinants, as follows: teacher self-efficacy, working conditions (workload, daily tasks), teacher relations and collaborations (collegiality, student behavior, support from management, educational resources), and professional development/promotion. These determinants were identified in several schools from the North-West region of Romania through an online questionnaire, answered by 658 teachers from the K-12 (pre-university) state-funded educational system.

Teacher well-being is highly dependent on factors that produce attrition, burnout, and teacher turnover. It was found that teachers deal with significantly high levels of stress and low levels of well-being [ 59 ]. Other studies show that teachers may have high levels of stress but they also have high levels of job satisfaction, as Kyriacou highlights [ 60 ]. One study pinpointed work overload as often the highest stress trigger, as Austin et al. showed [ 61 ]. In this context, the work of Pithers warns against generalizations about stress-related issues among teachers that may not have been tested for validity and reliability [ 62 ]. Teacher self-confidence, the sense of personal agency and resilience [ 63 ], plays an important part in developing well-being in the school environment by reducing stress and attrition through development and well-being programs designed for the teaching profession [ 64 ].

1.2. Research Hypotheses

This section presents a theoretical perspective on job satisfaction and the determinant factors that influence it in the working environment. Starting from the literature review, we aimed at identifying the most important factors that influence job satisfaction. Following on from the results, we proposed a series of hypotheses that would aid us in analyzing the relationship between job satisfaction and these determinants, among teachers from the K-12 educational system in the North-West region of Romania.

1.2.1. Self-Efficacy

The term “self-efficacy” was defined by Bandura in 1977 [ 65 ], and it can be applied to education in terms of the conviction of teachers that they can execute behavior that produces results or outcomes. As Roberts et al. concluded, teacher self-efficacy increases through in-service programs, even if teachers begin with low self-efficacy [ 66 ]. For teachers in primary schools, the results are in tune with current literature that highlights the difficulties faced by teachers in developing their self-efficacy. Although self-efficacy begins with a teacher’s own experiences, and even if it develops as experience is gained, personal beliefs about self-efficacy tend to become rigid. Self-efficacy should focus on what a teacher can do, especially in a particular subject, not as an overall perspective [ 67 ]. Sandholtz and Ringstaff obtained positive results for teachers who worked in challenging environments, after a three-year professional development program [ 68 ]. Coupled with practice and identity, self-efficacy has positive results for teacher retention, as Polizzi et al. showed, because teacher communities of practice are organized as networks [ 39 , 55 , 69 , 70 ]. Velthuis, Fisser, and Pieters found that pre-service improvement programs increased teacher self-efficacy, meaning that universities should improve their educational offer [ 71 ]. Wang and Tsai argued that science-teacher hardiness, which is a result of teacher self-efficacy, prompts science hardiness in students, aiding them in developing self-efficacy, but it must be coupled with teacher support [ 72 ]. As Dalioglu and Adiguzel [ 73 ] found, teacher self-efficacy does not change, under certain conditions, with regard to class management, but it does improve student teaching levels. Whether face to face or online, teacher job satisfaction is also related to factors such as teaching flexibility regarding when, where, and how teaching occurs, because this allows teachers to meet student needs, gives more time for interacting individually with students, and, finally, offers teachers satisfaction when the efforts they put into teaching have results in student performance, as Borup and Stevens found [ 74 ].

Self-efficacy is not the same in all countries, as Avalos and Bascope showed, proving that without adequate implementation and expert support, teachers’ preparation will be lacking [ 75 ]. Lamote and Engels found that self-efficacy decreased when student teachers engaged in classroom practice following a pupil-centered approach, where focus on the subject matter, classroom order, and long-term qualifications decreased. First-year students tended to have content-oriented views of learning and teaching, but these developed in the second and third years into pupil-oriented views [ 76 ]. As years of experience accumulated, self-efficacy increased, but after about 23 years it began to decline, as Klassen and Chiu observed [ 67 ]. Teachers’ self-efficacy can be expanded and perfected through specialized training programs that have a high level of complexity and require teachers to delve deeper into their knowledge of teaching and learning, as shown by Catalano, Albulescu, and Stan [ 77 ]. Teacher self-efficacy is improved by teacher interaction, which positively affects student self-efficacy, as proven by Hwang and Ham [ 78 ]. Zakariya [ 55 ] provided an ample study that proved the connection between teacher self-efficacy, job satisfaction, and school climate. By utilizing structural equation modelling, he concluded that between school climate and job satisfaction there is a strong direct relationship. In addition, he identified a strong and direct relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction. All the three self-efficacy types that he studied had an impact on job satisfaction, but the greatest influence was exerted by self-efficacy in instruction. Studies by Edinger and Edinger [ 79 ] and Skaalvik and Skaalvik [ 80 ] arrived at similar results, even though the dimensions of teacher self-efficacy were slightly different. Molero et al. [ 81 ] used cluster analysis for 500 high school teachers and found that low levels of burnout seemed to increase self-efficacy, which in turn increased job satisfaction. A study by Capone and Petrillo [ 82 ] argued that fewer teachers claimed to be flourishing in their job, with a lower prevalence of depression and burnout but higher levels of job satisfaction and self-efficacy, while most were moderately satisfied. In the context of self-efficacy, mastery of a certain subject was not enough to prepare future generations of students. Teachers are required to develop self-efficacy also in relation to personal and social skills, and also to develop active, involved, and engaging teaching–learning experiences that are combined with well-being [ 83 ]. In a similar manner, another study, by Yang et al. [ 84 ], argued that in Sweden, based on the TALIS 2013 document, the most substantial total effect on job satisfaction, came from self-efficacy, with a direct effect of 0.15 and an indirect effect of 0.07. The same significant effect was reported for Norway also, with the highest total effect of 0.28. The results are not the same in all studies. Shaukat et al. [ 85 ] found that there was no significant correlation between a teacher’s self-efficacy, beliefs, and job satisfaction, but a key factor was the school environment where teachers worked with children with disabilities.

Teachers’ self-efficacy has a positive effect on teachers’ job satisfaction. Teachers’ self-efficacy is the strongest predictor of job satisfaction.

1.2.2. Working Conditions

Teaching relies on creativity, which takes up time. Selamat et al. [ 86 ] have showed that teachers’ job satisfaction diminishes when the workload increases, arguing that organizational climate is important for job satisfaction. Organizational climate proved to be an important factor that had a high influence on job performance, and it rested on the support and hindrance resulting from leadership and teacher behavior. Ghavifekr and Pillai [ 54 ] considered that organizational climate increased job satisfaction and teacher retention. The results also showed that work overload could hamper teaching as a main educational objective, even if working conditions had a relatively low impact on teacher job satisfaction compared to other analyzed factors. Knox [ 87 ] pointed out that routine tasks lower job satisfaction, whereas flexibility and a sense of the importance of teaching, coupled with the conviction that teachers can make a difference in the lives of students, results in greater job satisfaction. Kloep and Tarifa [ 88 ] argued that despite economic and physical conditions, at least to a certain extent, teacher job satisfaction and class involvement can be high, provided professional autonomy and social support exist [ 88 , 89 ]. Furthermore, Kloep and Tarifa concluded that, in the case of Albania, teachers considered material rewards to be highly valued, but their overall significance for job satisfaction was lower than job autonomy, described in terms of opportunities and challenges. As Abu Taleb [ 90 ] pointed out, teachers may have average job satisfaction levels, but this depends on working conditions coupled with children’s behavior and parents’ involvement. Job satisfaction among kindergarten teachers is ranked as average. In a wider context, teacher job satisfaction influences children’s educational outcomes. The issue of excessive workload has been identified as leading to emotional exhaustion, teacher turnover, and attrition among teachers [ 91 ]. Job satisfaction is influenced by the workload, which translates into hectic schedules and many interruptions from tasks that are already in progress, amounting to too many tasks in too little time. Rest and relaxation were also affected. Teachers expect to have a high workload in their profession, but if it becomes highly bureaucratic and takes up too much time from other teaching activities, it contributes to lower well-being, even if the excuse for engaging in such tasks is related to the success of the entire department or the entire institution. Raza and Arid [ 92 ] showed that teacher job satisfaction decreased when teachers had to deal with clerical tasks unrelated to teaching. However, teachers considered preparing class notes, keeping class attendance records, and recording test marks as clerical work that, albeit necessary, still affected job performance.

Teacher daily activity is not reduced only to the act of teaching, but it encompasses administrative and teaching tasks that can affect work intensity. Ballet and Kelchtermans argue [ 93 ] that this is considered challenging and complex [ 94 ], generating decreased job satisfaction [ 95 ]. Tasks are still considered to be what defines part of a teacher’s self-identity, together with self-image, self-esteem, job motivation, and future-oriented perceptions [ 96 ]. Canrinus et al. [ 97 ] argued that job motivation, self-efficacy, occupational commitment, and changes in the level of motivation lead to a sense of professional identity in which tasks are seen as an important part of strong work satisfaction and work engagement, as also found by Li, Liu, and Zhang [ 98 ]. It seems that teachers with high levels of self-efficacy have more confidence in engaging with and completing school-related tasks, which leads to increased job satisfaction, as shown by Peng and Mao [ 99 ]. Anastasiou and Belios [ 100 ] conducted research aimed at identifying how age impacts job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion in primary school teachers in Greece. The age range was from 20 to beyond 50, while work experience ranged from 0 to over 21 years, and the study included both female and male teachers. The results showed that emotional exhaustion was negatively influenced by job satisfaction and age, caused most frequently by extrinsic job characteristics such as working conditions and working hours. Liu and Ramsey [ 101 ] analyzed the situation in the United States and found that teachers were least satisfied with regard to compensation and work conditions. They considered that work conditions did not allow them enough time to prepare and plan classes. Workload was considered excessive during a typical school week.

Workload has a negative effect on job satisfaction.

Daily tasks have a negative effect on job satisfaction.

1.2.3. Teacher Relations and Collaborations

Hewett and La Paro [ 102 ] defined collegiality as social interactions and a feeling of belonging within the teacher community, which contributes to program quality but not classroom quality. As Hur, Jeon, and Buettner [ 103 ] pointed out, collegiality contributes to increased job satisfaction and leads to positive child-centered beliefs. The perceived collegiality and teacher influence was positively associated with teacher job satisfaction, and in turn with child-centered beliefs. In other contexts, reforms can have negative effects, such as compromised teacher collegiality, which lead to lower job satisfaction, higher levels of stress, and teacher turnover, as pointed out by Liu, Xu, and Stronge [ 104 ]. Mieke and Vandenberghe [ 105 ] assert that both autonomy and collegiality need to be considered for increased job satisfaction and positive working conditions. Autonomy and collegiality need to be assessed in a balanced way, because they have certain forms, which coupled with workplace conditions seem to have a higher positive influence on the professional development of teachers. Collaboration is part of the teaching profession; therefore, efficient collaboration with colleagues [ 7 ] increases well-being and has beneficial effects on the classroom environment, as Yang et al. [ 84 ] pointed out. Zoller et al. [ 7 ] observed that teachers have an internal desire to learn and develop professionally. In the case of Romanian teachers, effective professional development programs have a high impact on job satisfaction. The variables of the methodological culture dimension, such as teacher effectiveness, disciplined atmosphere, and teacher–student relationships, also influence job satisfaction.

Teachers are involved to a high degree in education-based student relationships, having a basic need for relatedness, as Spilt, Koomen, and Thijs argued [ 106 ]. Further, Lavy and Bocker presented the case for teachers’ sense of meaning and sense of self affecting teacher–student relationships, as well as job satisfaction [ 107 ]. Gender seems to be an important factor in how the school environment and student relationships are perceived and evaluated, according to the study by Huang [ 108 ]. Furthermore, it appears that student–teacher relationships are important for increasing job satisfaction in veteran teachers, as pointed out by Admiraal et al., who also showed that veteran teachers who have lower job satisfaction can be helped through sustained support [ 109 ]. In the case of disruptive students, collaboration between the teacher and principal seems to be efficient in solving classroom issues and increasing teacher job commitment by offering a sense of belonging, according to Collie [ 110 ]. Gil-Flores [ 111 ] found that positive teacher–student relationships, where the teacher listens to the students and therefore promotes the student’s well-being, played the most significant role in the prediction of teacher job satisfaction. Madero [ 112 ] contributed to the debate, claiming that, in agreement with the literature, less-dissatisfied teachers collaborated efficiently with their peers and also operated in a culture of school participation. His study refers to secondary teachers in schools from Mexico, Chile, and Brazil. Along the same lines, Zakariya [ 55 ] argued that job satisfaction is influenced by a direct positive effect of teacher–student relations. Buonomo et al. [ 113 ] conducted similar research on job satisfaction, analyzing whether collective beliefs and emotions regarding the professional role were a predictor of job satisfaction. The age range varied from 26 to 65, and the job experience ranged from 1 to 41 years. Their findings showed that job satisfaction increased when the teaching profession was considered in terms of being part of a professional community, with positive relations with colleagues, students, and families.

Teachers who are professional and understand their jobs have increased well-being, provided they are allowed to do what they know is worth doing, as a result of strong beliefs and values, which increase student well-being and hence the quality of teaching programs, as Hall Kenyon et al. [ 114 ] found.

Hewett and La Paro [ 102 ] defined supervisor support as teachers’ perceptions of leadership and the support offered. In this sense, Da’as [ 58 ] made the case for principals using cognitive skills to limit absenteeism, rather than exceptional or charismatic behavior, thus increasing organizational performance. This finding led to a similar one, posited by Ghavifekr and Pillai [ 54 ], who argued that within a well-organized school climate, the responsibility factor increased job satisfaction. Cann et al. [ 115 ] explained how leadership positively influences job satisfaction and enhances well-being, defined as feeling valued, having meaningful professional development, and having a part in decision-making. Chong, Mansur, and Ho [ 116 ] encouraged leadership development for principals, as it increases job satisfaction and teacher retention. The extent of professional involvement of teachers in the decision-making process has an important outcome in the development of school policies [ 117 ]. The study conducted by Yao, You, and Zhu [ 118 ] showed that if teachers receive adequate support from management, their affective commitment increases and is followed by positive job performance, hence generating increased job satisfaction. In addition, in another quantitative study, Sun and Xia [ 119 ] analyzed the relationship between the perceptions of the teachers of school-climate leadership, job satisfaction, and teacher self-efficacy, using multi-level structural equation modelling. The results showed that leaders who include teachers in the leadership decision-making process, have a positive effect on job satisfaction. Ainley and Carstens [ 120 ] found that schools that have interactions between school principals, teachers, and students, in a framework of distributed leadership, are more likely to have teachers with higher job satisfaction levels. The findings are similar to those of Torres [ 121 ], Sims [ 122 ], and Liu and Werblow [ 123 ], who found a positive relationship between effective leadership and job satisfaction. Liu and Werblow [ 123 ] also suggested that an important factor in increasing job satisfaction among principals and teachers, at both personal and organizational levels, was strongly dependent on the manner in which principals and teachers develop collegiality and team leadership in instructional management.

Teacher well-being in the educational system refers to feeling valued, meaningful professional development, and being involved in decision-making. Well-being is achieved mainly when decision-makers, such as principals or school managers, show skills such as relationship building, contextual competence, and social and emotional competence [ 115 ]. The leadership style can have positive effects on job satisfaction by enhancing workforce performance and organizational goals, through motivation and a gradual increase of organizational commitment, as Altaf et al. [ 124 ] demonstrated. Badulescu, Bungau, and Badulescu [ 125 ] argued in favor of learning processes that are aligned with sustainable development, for benefiting and optimizing the educational environment in the long run, after students have graduated.

The teaching environment requires several types of resources, which influence both job satisfaction and well-being, together with teacher engagement, but further research is needed, as Skaalvik and Skaalvik argued [ 126 ]. Simbula et al. [ 127 ] found that job resources, self-efficacy, and work engagement are related, but over time, leading to the conclusion that teacher engagement depends on both well-resourced environments and self-efficacy. On the same note, Demerouti et al. [ 128 ] showed that if job demands are related to teacher exhaustion and burnout, lack of job resources is related to teacher disengagement. Educational resources need to be viewed at a larger scale, to include technological devices, as posited by Lee and Quek [ 129 ]. The issue of resources can be differentiated by job resources (such as perceived autonomy support, opportunities for professional learning and relationships with colleagues) and personal resources (such as adaptability, cognitive and behavioral coping, and self-efficacy, which applies to both personal and organization levels) [ 130 , 131 ]. As Kiss [ 132 ] argued, the educational system seems to be in a permanent state of transition; therefore, a high degree of flexibility is needed to properly adapt to various new scenarios, that must benefit both teachers and students. Toropova et al. [ 39 ] argued that in comparison with other studied factors such as student discipline, teacher cooperation, and teacher workload, the factor of referring to school materials has a lower effect on job satisfaction. Working in a school environment may lead to high strain regarding job demands and resources, because job demands such as workload, disciplinary issues, and time pressure can impact job resources such as perceived autonomy, professional learning, and collegiality, leading to low engagement, burnout, and negative school environment outcomes that will also negatively impact well-being [ 5 , 130 ].

Collegiate cooperation has a positive effect on job satisfaction.

Respectful behavior of students has a positive effect on teachers’ job satisfaction.

Support from school management has a significant and positive effect on teachers’ job satisfaction.

The resources of the educational institution have a positive effect on job satisfaction.

1.2.4. Professional Development/Promotion

An integral part of the educational system is the possibility of, and the ability to, develop professionally. Despite the possibility existing, there are situations in which teachers can reach a career plateau, which negatively impacts job satisfaction, as Drucker-Godard et al. found [ 133 ]. Job satisfaction dimensions may include career development, school management, teacher and research services, salary, and also the work itself, according to Du, Lai, and Lo [ 134 ]. An important element of professional development is the freedom to choose such development from the perspective of career advancement [ 135 ]. In a broader category, teachers, as knowledge workers, define professional development opportunities as a flexible work schedule and colleague support, as well as work–family relations and job security, which also influence job satisfaction, as argued by Viñas-Bardolet, Torrent-Sellens, and Guillen-Royo [ 136 ]. Eren suggested that policy makers need to take into consideration the factors that influence pre-service teachers’ engagement and retention, along with aspirations in the teaching profession and professional development, since these factors may lead to decisions to remain in or leave the profession [ 137 ]. Teacher well-being is enhanced through ongoing support to perfect teaching skills and abilities, which are manifest throughout the teacher’s career and which need to be designed and developed, since they will inevitably affect the well-being of students [ 138 , 139 ]. Yang et al. [ 84 ], based on an analysis of four countries: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and Norway, concluded that in Sweden and Norway, the effect of professional development on teacher job satisfaction is significant and direct, while in Denmark and Finland the effect of professional development on job satisfaction is lower. Toropova et al. [ 39 ] also concluded that professional development has a positive effect on job satisfaction. The study showed that teachers with longer exposure to their career and to professional development seemed to have higher job satisfaction levels. Along the same line of argument, Sims [ 140 ], based on an international perspective, found a positive relationship between professional development and job satisfaction. Ma and MacMillan [ 141 ] and Liu and Ramsey [ 101 ] reached the same conclusion, but based on an analysis performed in a single country (Canada).

Career promotion has a significant effect on teachers’ job satisfaction.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. data collection procedure and the sample.

The cross-sectional quantitative research was conducted with non-random convenience sampling in order to determine the main factors that influence teachers’ job satisfaction, in order to determine the implications that these determinants have for sustainable education. The proposed model contains nine constructs, namely: job satisfaction (JS), self-efficacy (EFFIC), students’ behavior (STUD), leadership condition (COND), resources (RESO), colleagues’ cooperation (COLEG), career promotion (PROM), workload (WORK), and tasks (TASK). The factors were determined using a questionnaire. The questionnaire was designed to capture as well as possible the specific characteristics of teachers’ satisfaction at work, working conditions, and the relationships they have with students/colleagues. Therefore, the questionnaire was composed of two main parts: the first part contained information about the demographic of the respondents, i.e., gender, age, education level, experience, teaching level, teaching degree, profession type, residence, teaching location, and income level, while the second part contained questions or items that characterized the job satisfaction among teachers (JS) and a series of questions or items that allowed the teacher’s activities at work (relationship with colleagues, relationship with students, relationship with school management, etc.) to be analyzed. In the second part of the questionnaire, all the measurement scales were evaluated on a 5-point Likert scale, where “1 = strongly disagree” and “5 = strongly agree” or “1 = never” and “5 = many times”. Moreover, in order to maintain the uniqueness of the measurements, the questionnaire was written in Romanian and then translated into English. Before applying this questionnaire, we conducted a pilot test on a sample of 40 teachers (10 teachers, 10 middle school teachers, 10 educators and 10 high school teachers) to verify the accuracy and precision of the questions, after which the questionnaire was revised according to the observations received from the 40 teachers.

Therefore, for data collection, the questionnaire was transposed to an online format in Google Forms and sent to teachers from Romania, in Bihor and Satu Mare counties, in May 2021, by email. The data were downloaded from Google Forms into MS Excel, IBM SPSS Statistics 26 (version 26.0.0, New York, NY, USA), and IBM SPSS Amos 26 (version 26.0.0, Amos Development Corporation, Wexford, PA, USA) and verified for coding accuracy. Given that in Google Forms we had the option to make the answers mandatory, the database was complete and did not contain missing data. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed in IBM SPSS Statistics. IBM SPSS Amos was used to test the hypotheses and the model by modelling the structural equation (SEM). Regarding the sample size, Schumacker and Lomax [ 142 ] suggested that a minimum of 10–20 subjects per parameter estimated in the model are optimal, while Kline [ 143 ] and Hair et al. [ 144 ] suggested that there should be a minimum of 10 cases per parameter or item required for the statistical analysis. Regarding the sample size in the situation where we want to determine whether an SEM model is adequate or not, according to Kline [ 145 ] and Marsh et al. [ 146 ], a sample size of 200 is a suitable minimum for SEM in SPSS Amos. Therefore, a minimum of 420 responses was required, given that the number of items in the proposed model was 42. Therefore, the sample size of 658 respondents exceeded the above and the analysis was justified. Furthermore, for testing SEM measurement models, it is necessary to simultaneously meet a set of conditions [ 147 , 148 ]: the data should be normally distributed, for each latent variable it is recommended to have at least three indicators, to avoid missing data, recursion of relationships, and interval scales, and a reasonable sample size is required relative to the number of indicators in the model, as mentioned above. In the following, we will briefly refer to each step that must be performed in order to build a model using structural equation modelling.

2.2. Respondent’s Profile

Among the 658 respondents (see Table 1 ), 89.75% of the teachers were female and 10.3% were male. Most of the respondents were aged 40–50 (41%), followed by the 30–40 group (25.4%) and the 50–60 age group (20.7%); 3.6% were aged 60 or above and 9.3% were aged 20–30. Moreover, the majority of the respondents had a bachelor’s degree (48.9%), followed by those with a master’s degree (47.3%), and a PhD degree (3.8%). Regarding the teacher’s experience, most of them had over 20 years of experience, 31.6% had between 10 and 20 years, 13.5% between 3 and 9 years and 5.9% had under 3 years. Among the respondents, 4.4% taught in preschool, 43.3% taught in primary school, 26.4% in lower secondary and 25.8% in higher secondary. Most of the teachers had a first degree (68,1%), followed by 19.3% without a degree, and 12.6% with a second degree. Out of the 658 teachers, 415 were teachers, 201 were primary school teachers, 16 were educators and 26 were auxiliary teaching staff.

Respondent profile.

Another aspect that we analyzed referred to the environment of origin of teachers and the environment in which they taught (urban or rural). We noted that most of those who completed the questionnaire came from urban areas (74%), and only 69% taught in urban areas. The respondents also indicated their income. Most of the teachers had an income of over RON 3000 (77.5%), 17% had an income between RON 2500 and 3000, and approximately 5% had an income between RON 2000 and 2500, while only 5 teachers had an income under RON 2500.

2.3. The Model

Well-being, coupled with life satisfaction and quality of life, is connected to the issue of job satisfaction, since this is a significant part of employees’ lives but they are influenced also by unemployment. According to the literature review, there are several factors that influence well-being, such as health and safety or the benefits of a contract, but also job status. Thus, in order to identify the impact that factors such as working conditions, promotion, relationships with colleagues and school management, relationships with students, and daily tasks have on job satisfaction among teachers, we proposed a series of items after studying the literature. Table A1 presents the items with which we studied job satisfaction, working conditions, relationships with colleagues, daily tasks, and self-efficacy, these being adapted largely after Klassen and Chiu [ 67 ], Toropova, Myrberg, and Johansson [ 39 ], Önder, Akçıl, and Cemaloğlu [ 56 ], Szromek and Wolniak [ 70 ], and Stevens [ 149 ]. Each latent variable was modified by the authors.

The analysis process was started by testing the measurement model through exploratory factor analysis (EFA), starting from the items presented in Table A1 . Variables with factor loadings under 0.4 were deleted [ 150 ]. Taking into account this condition we had: job satisfaction (JS) measured by five variables (JS1, JS2, JS3, JS4, JS5), the career promotion latent variable made up of three variables (PROM1, PROM2, PROM3), students’ behavior made up of four variables (STUD1, STUD2, STUD3, STUD4), leadership support measured by eight variables (COND1, COND2, COND3, COND4, COND5, COND6, COND7, COND8), resources made up of three variables (RESO1, RESO2, RESO3), relationships with colleagues measured by six variables (COLEG1, COLEG2, COLEG3, COLEG4, COLEG5, COLEG6), workload made up of three variables (WORK1, WORK2, WORK3), self-efficacy measured by seven variables (EFFIC1, EFFIC2, EFFIC3, EFFIC4, EFFIC5, EFFIC6, EFFIC7) and tasks measured by four variables (TASK1, TASK2, TASK3, TASK4). Thus, starting from these indicators, the study aimed at testing the hypotheses, in order to determine the relationship between K-12 teacher job satisfaction and working conditions, relations with students, colleagues and the school management, and the resources that the teachers have at the workplace.

The arrows that link latent variables such as JS, PROM, TASK, WORK, EFFIC, COLEG, COND, RESO, and STUD, represent causal relationships in the direction of the arrows ( Figure 1 ). The objectives of this study were to test the eight hypotheses. Error terms for all observed indicators are indicated by e1 to e50.

Proposed research model for the study.

2.4. Data Analysis

In order to analyze the statistical data, we used the statistical software IBM SPSS v. 26.0 (New York, NY, USA) and Amos 26.0 (Amos Development Corporation, Wexford, PA, USA) To test the eight hypotheses stated we used EFA (exploratory factor analysis), CFA (confirmatory factor analysis), and SEM (structural equation modelling). Before performing the EFA analysis, we tested the levels of correlation between the analyzed items. We applied the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy and the Bartlett test to determine whether there was a sufficiently high correlation to perform the analysis. According to the theory, values of KMO statistics less than 0.50 indicate that the EFA analysis may not be adequate [ 151 , 152 , 153 ], regarding the sphericity test of Bartlett’s test of the null hypothesis that the correlation matrix is an identity matrix; that is, the variables were indeed uncorrelated. If the statistic p was less than 0.10, the null hypothesis could not be rejected, so we could say that the variables were indeed correlated [ 154 ]. After checking the level of correlation between the items, we applied the EFA analysis to extract the factors using a varimax rotation. In the analysis, we kept only those items with factorial loads greater than 0.40, while those with loads less than 0.40 were deleted. The next step was the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), which was performed to first test the overall suitability of the measurement model and then to assess the reliability and validity of the latent variables. The last stage of the study consisted of analyzing the causal relationships of the constructs using structural equations modelling (SEM) and the model fit indexes.

2.5. Exploratory Factor Analysis

The first step was to perform the EFA with the 42 items. The KMO statistic had a value of 0.926, which is higher than 0.5, confirming the sampling adequacy. As regards Bartlett’s test of sphericity, the value of this statistic was 19,912.83, with df = 861 and p < 0.001, which provided evidence of a significant correlation between the items. We therefore proceeded with the exploratory factor analysis. The final items, i.e., the eigenvalues, the proportion of variance, the cumulative variance and the Cronbach’s alpha are presented in Table A2 . The loadings from the nine factors extracted, had a cumulative value of 73.39% in explaining the total variance in the data.

According to the results we can affirm that the first factor explained 29.93% of the variance, the second factor 9.31%, the third factor 8.91%, the fourth factor 6.19%, the fifth factor 5.18%, the sixth factor 4.56%, the seventh factor 3.40%, the eighth factor 2.98%, and the ninth factor 2.92% of the variance. Therefore, by performing the EFA we obtained nine factors that explained the variance: factor 1—leadership condition; factor 2—self-efficacy; factor 3—colleague relationship; factor 4—job satisfaction; factor 5—the tasks; factor 6—students’ behavior; factor 7—promotion; factor 8—resources; factor 9—workload. To analyze the reliability of the nine extracted factors, we used Cronbach’s alpha, and the contribution of each element to the scale seemed to be satisfactory. According to the literature, the recommended limit value to be considered in Cronbach’s alpha is 0.60 [ 155 ]. Following the analysis, we found that the elimination of any factor did not improve the reliability of the entire scale (α = 0.919). Thus, the reliability of the proposed model in this form was established. Moreover, the reliability of each factor was calculated in the next section.

2.6. Reliability Analysis

In order to investigate the accuracy and the consistency of the model, we used confirmation factor analysis (CFA). In addition, for validation we used discriminant and convergent validity together with the reliability analysis ( Table 2 ). Given the Fornell–Larcker criterion [ 156 ] for convergent validity, the average extracted variance (AVE) should be greater than 0.5. Furthermore, Hair et al. [ 157 ] considered that the AVE should be higher than 0.5 and the reliability of the composite (CR) should be above 0.7. Therefore, in order to test the reliability, we used three tests: Cronbach’s alpha (α), the average variance extracted index (AVE), and composite reliability (CR). According to the results presented in Table 2 , the values of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for every construct ranged from 0.692 to 0.995. According to the literature, there is no unanimously accepted standard that indicates what value a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient should have in order to indicate a proper fidelity. However, there are a number of benchmarks that are interpreted similarly by researchers. If the value of the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is around 0.90 we can consider that we have excellent fidelity, if it is around 0.80 we have very good fidelity, and if the coefficient is around 0.70 we have adequate fidelity [ 158 ]. Researchers [ 155 ] consider that in the case of exploratory research, a value of 0.60 for the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients can be accepted. Therefore, the reliability of each construct that we tested was confirmed as high, since the values exceeded the recommended cut-off point of 0.6. Furthermore, in our analysis we tested the composite reliability (CR) in order to evaluate the scales with several items [ 159 , 160 ]. According to Kline [ 158 ], the composite reliability (CR), also called the rho-factor coefficient, is the ratio between the explained dispersion and the total dispersion. The value of this coefficient should be greater than 0.6 [ 160 ]. Thus, considering the results obtained, we can say that the factor loadings reached values in the range of 0.82 to 0.96, and these values are significantly higher than 0.60, the limit identified in the literature. Regarding the average variance extracted (AVE), all AVE values varied between 0.61 and 0.80, exceeding the cut-off point of 0.5 suggested by the literature [ 143 , 144 ]. Therefore, we can argue that the proposed model meets all the criteria for convergent validity.

Reliability analysis.

Considering that all the analyzed items were evaluated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from “1 = strongly disagree” to “5 = strongly agree” and “1 = never” to “5 = always”, in our analysis we determined the mean values of the nine latent variables. Starting from these results we could identify which factor was considered by teachers as the most important and also which factor could influence job satisfaction to the greatest extent. We noted that the highest average value was efficacy (mean = 4.48), so we can say that teachers consider it very important to ask questions appropriate to the level of each student and provide alternative explanations for students in difficulty, and also that they consider it is very important to inspire students to invest in the discipline they teach.

Another factor that could influence job satisfaction is related to leadership, namely, the involvement of the school management in the activities they carry out at school. According to the results, we can say that the teachers who answered this questionnaire were of the opinion that the school management appreciated efficient teaching (mean = 4.26), that the collaboration between the school management and teachers for planning training was optimal (mean = 4.21), and that the management provided assistance whenever needed and was willing to listen to the teachers’ suggestions (mean = 4.17). In addition, according to the results, school leadership offered optimal instructional support to the teaching staff (mean = 4.14) and optimal support for professional development to the teaching staff (mean = 4.10). The teachers gave a lower value to the statement that the school leadership treated the entire teaching staff equitably. As regards the school leadership offering advice on how to improve teaching methods, the teachers considered that the advice was insufficient and must be improved. Furthermore, the workload, item “I have too much material to prepare for class” had a fairly high average value of 3.44, and hence we can say that teachers think they have too much material to prepare for class, an activity that could be considered as one that negatively influences job satisfaction. In addition, planning, developing, and organizing the teaching process (mean = 2.93) registered a fairly high average value. Thus, we can say that teachers believe that planning, developing, and organizing the teaching process is itself a process that requires the allocation of significant extra hours that do not affect the teaching process, and should be reduced. Furthermore, the reliability of each factor was also determined. The removal of any element did not seem to improve the reliability of each factor (between 0.692 and 0.995); therefore, all items were retained.

The correlation coefficient measures the strength and direction of the relationships between all the variables studied ( Table 3 ). According to the results, there was a significantly positive correlation between job satisfaction and students’ behavior, leadership condition, resources, colleague relationships, promotion, and self-efficacy and a negative correlation between job satisfaction and tasks and workload. Regarding the correlation of job satisfaction with the other factors analyzed, we found a moderately significant correlation; the Pearson’s correlation coefficient was between −0.161 and 0.465, for n = 658 (** p < 0.01).

Correlation coefficient.

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

In order to examine the discriminant validity of each construct, we computed the square roots of the AVE values and compared these values with the correlation coefficients. For an acceptable discriminant validity, the square roots of the AVE values should be larger than the correlations of each construct [ 161 ]. In our case, the square roots of the AVE values of all constructs (0.80–0.90) exceeded the correlation coefficients (−0.009 to 0.577) for each construct [ 145 ]. The results in Table 4 show that the discriminant validity was acceptable.

Discriminant validity.

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Square root of AVE values for every construct on the diagonal.

3.1. Structural Equations Modelling

In order to test the validity of the measurement model, we used structural equations modelling (SEM). The estimation of the model consists in obtaining some idea of the parameters that compose the reproduced matrix, so that they are similar to those in the initial matrix [ 162 , 163 ]. The most commonly used methods of estimating the parameters are the maximum likelihood estimation method and the generalized least squares method [ 164 ].

The identification and interpretation of the fit indexes resulting from the estimation of the model allowed us to draw some conclusions regarding the tested model. In the literature, there is much debate about the clues that should be reported in order to decide if the model is the right one. Thus, a number of authors [ 162 , 163 , 164 ] recommend the analysis of three categories of indexes: (a) goodness-of-fit measures such as chi-square, root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA), goodness-of-fit index (GFI), and adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI); (b) model comparison indexes such as the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), normed fit index (NFI), and comparative fit index (CFI); indexes regarding the parsimony of the model such as the parsimony fit index (PFI) and parsimony normed fit index (PNFI). All of these indexes indicate a good model fit.

Starting with the chi-square index, we can affirm that this was significant at probability level = 0.00: chi-square = 3098.065 with 852 degrees of freedom (df = 852) and chi-square/df was 3.63, which is less than 5. In order to evaluate the fit of the model, some researchers also proposed the use of the goodness-of-fit index, which takes into account the amount of variance and the predicted covariance in the reproduced matrix. A value greater than or equal to 0.90 is an acceptable value, and a GFI value of 1 indicates a perfect fit of the model [ 165 ]. Another index is the adjusted goodness-of-fit index which adjusts the GFI index to the number of degrees of freedom of the model, which is related to the number of variables in the model. A value greater than or equal to 0.80 is an acceptable value, and a value of 1 indicates a perfect fit of the model [ 164 ]. In our case these two indexes are significant: GFI = 0.909 and AGFI = 0.806. Unlike the chi-square index, RMSEA takes into account the number of estimated parameters but not the sample size. Thus, a value of RMSEA ≤ 0.05 indicates a very good model, and a value less than or equal to 0.08 shows that the model is acceptable. Because RMSEA = 0.06 we can argue that the model was acceptable. For the model comparison index, we determined the NFI (NFI = 0.916) which exceeded 0.9, indicating that the index showed an acceptable fit [ 148 ]. The literature review proposed several indexes that evaluate the parsimony of the model. A parsimonious model is the simplest or narrowest model that explains the analyzed phenomenon. In our study, the parsimonious fit index (PFI) was 0.940, while the PNFI was 0.805; both indexes are greater than or equal to 0.50 showing that the model is a suitable one [ 165 ]. In conclusion, these indexes confirmed that the proposed structural model was acceptable and suitable for the analysis and interpretation of the coefficient estimates ( Figure 2 ).

Estimates of the structural equation modelling.

3.2. Hypothesis Testing and Estimates

According to the statistical significance of the eight hypotheses proposed, we determined the standardized regression coefficients between the dependent variable and the independent variables and the significance level ( p -value) of each coefficient, starting from the structural equations modelling output. A hypothesis is accepted when the presence of a statistically significant relationship in the predicted direction is confirmed. According to the results presented in Table 5 , only three hypotheses out of the eight were accepted at a significance level of 0.01, five hypotheses at a significance level of 0.05 and seven hypotheses at a significance level of 0.10.

Summary of the hypotheses’ testing results.

As Table 5 shows, all hypotheses were accepted except for H2, which was not accepted according to any of the three significance thresholds. Thus, the present findings, except for the relationship between job satisfaction and workload, are consistent with the proposed hypotheses. PROM, STUD, and EFFIC have a significant and positive impact on JB, since the coefficients (H8: β = 0.226; H5: β = 0.220; H1: β = 0.338) are significant at the 1% significance level. In case of COND (H6: β = 0.119), this also shows a positive and significant impact on JS, but at the 5% significance level, while the RESO and COLEG variables are significantly related to JB, since the coefficients are significant at the 10% significance level (H7: β = 0.066; H4: β = 0.066). Another factor that influences job satisfaction is represented by the latent variable TASK. This variable has a significant and negative impact on JB, since the coefficient, β = −0.079, is significant at the 5% level.

The strongest direct effect was found between EFFIC and JS (H1 accepted). The results suggest that when self-efficacy increases, the job satisfaction of teachers also increases. The next factor that positively influences job satisfaction is their relationships with students, followed by promotion and working conditions. Resources and relationships with colleagues also positively influence job satisfaction, but to a smaller extent. Regarding the daily tasks that teachers have to perform, the more they are in number, the lower the degree of job satisfaction of teachers. According to the results, we can say that when self-efficacy increases by 1, job satisfaction increases by 0.338, and when tasks increase by 1, job satisfaction decreases by 0.079. Therefore, hypotheses H1, H3, H4, H5, H6, H7, and H8 are statistically validated, indicating that all variables related to the relationship with colleagues, the relationship with students, and the relationship with school management significantly influence the degree of teacher satisfaction in Romania.

4. Discussion and Practical Implications

Job satisfaction and teacher well-being are important factors for the school environment and teaching outcomes. They are factors that keep employees from leaving their field of work altogether or merely migrating from one job to another. Companies study employee and worker migration and leaving, to assess how to create better work environments and how to stabilize the workforce in such a way as to allow dedicated and gifted employees to put their abilities and competencies into practice. They also manage the benefits of certain employees who leave the company, arguing that some employees need to leave to maximize their working potential in other fields. In other cases, leaving one’s job has positive effects, because it cancels job-related tensions.

The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between teacher job satisfaction and four main categories of determinants: self-efficacy, relational factors (colleague collaboration, student behavior, school management), work-related factors (administrative workload, teaching tasks), and working conditions, among Romanian K-12 teachers, in schools from two counties situated in North-West Romania, in order to identify various implications for teachers’ well-being. Starting from the identified relations between job satisfaction and the eight indicators, we can propose several implications that these relations may have for teacher well-being. Considering the factors that have the greatest influence on job satisfaction, namely, self-efficacy and promotion, it could be argued that teacher well-being is positively affected by a sense of professionalism, belonging, self-worth, and happiness. Teachers who have self-efficacy tend to be promoted by the school leadership, as guarantees of a high standard of education. Parents tend to choose schools according to the proven efficacy of the teaching staff. In addition, teachers who have self-efficacy tend to be encouraged to seek promotion and aided in the process through the principal’s office. Promotion results in a higher salary, social exposure, and a positive image for the school. This also increases self-worth, happiness, and an overall feeling of belonging. On the other hand, working conditions have a negative effect on job satisfaction. Working conditions refers mainly to workload, and this is a problem because it means overtime and detracts from teaching activities, which are the main endeavor of teachers. Working conditions can lower job satisfaction which, in turn, affects well-being by creating a feeling of distress, because the main objective of teaching is not accomplished. Teachers can develop higher stress levels, leading to demotivation, if workload is a constant strain.

According to the collected data, the most important factor that contributes to high levels of job satisfaction among teachers is self-efficacy in class management, subject preparations, administrative work, and emotional management. Teacher self-efficacy refers to the ability of the teacher to inspire the students to learn, both within the school environment and outside it and to adapt one’s teaching to attract student interest in a certain subject. It also aims to develop students’ abilities to think critically and to motivate low-achieving students to become involved in class activities. Self-efficacy also refers to implementing alternative teaching and learning strategies for struggling students, by formulating questions tailored to their level of development. When teachers observe the positive effects of their decisions and actions, both for the students and within the school environment, coupled with support from school management and fellow teachers, the desire to be involved increases. Being appreciated and having a strong feeling of self-worth positively influences both job satisfaction and teacher well-being. According to the results, we consider our first hypothesis (H1) to be fully confirmed. Furthermore, the study results are in agreement with previous study results (Yang et al. [ 84 ], Zakariya [ 55 ], Edinger and Edinger [ 79 ], Skaalvik and Skaalvik [ 80 ], Molero et al. [ 81 ]) showing a positive relationship between job satisfaction and self-efficacy. In addition, the results of this study showed that of all the factors analyzed, self-efficacy influences job satisfaction the most, and this is an aspect also confirmed by Zakariya [ 55 ] and Yang et al. [ 84 ]. Zakariya [ 55 ] identified self-efficacy in instruction as having the greatest impact on job satisfaction, while Yang et al. [ 84 ] found that the most substantial total effect on job satisfaction came from teachers’ self-efficacy, in both Sweden and Norway. However, the results of our study are not in agreement with the study conducted by Shaukat et al. [ 85 ], for example, who found that there was no significant correlation between a teacher’s self-efficacy, beliefs, and job satisfaction, but that a key factor was the school environment.

The study also revealed that the second factor that greatly influences job satisfaction is the possibility of professional development. The teachers that answered the questionnaire believed that teaching guarantees promotion, due to several aspects specific to the Romanian educational system. Teachers believe that if they enter the educational system, they will benefit from professional advancement. Over time, they gain expertise through various professional development programs. The study also revealed that teachers consider the teaching profession as offering a secure future, due to the level of income coupled with various incentives. Teachers seem to be aware of the possibilities for promotion and strive to achieve it, despite systemic issues. The job security offered by the education system motivates teachers to positively engage with the work environment, despite various negative aspects, and to continue being engaged. This attitude promotes higher levels of job satisfaction. Thus, we can affirm that the results support and validate the eighth hypothesis (H8) of the study. This is in line with previous research [ 84 ] which showed that professional development has a substantial effect on teachers’ job satisfaction in Sweden (0.09 for the direct effect and 0.07 for the indirect effect) and Norway (0.16 for the direct effect and 0.08 for the indirect effect), while in Finland and Denmark, only a small indirect effect was found. Toropova et al. [ 39 ] and Sims [ 140 ] also showed that professional development was positively related to job satisfaction. Toropova et al. [ 39 ], in their study, showed that teachers with a longer exposure to career and professional development seemed to have higher job satisfaction levels.

Another important factor for job satisfaction is the teacher’s relationship to the students. Within this factor, the most important aspect is the level of respect that students have for the teaching staff, followed by students’ orderly behavior, care for school property, and respect for school rules. Teachers do not seem to expect flawless behavior from students, therefore certain misbehaviors are expected, but not serious offences. Job satisfaction increases due to positive interactions with students, on the grounds that the teacher’s emotional state is balanced, avoiding attrition and burnout. Well-being is increased when students acknowledge the teacher’s efforts. The positive effect of the teacher’s relationship to the students, identified in this study, is in line with other studies that show a similar relationship [ 55 , 112 ]. Gil-Flores [ 111 ] found that a positive teacher–student relationship, where the teacher listens to the students, promoting the students’ well-being, played the most significant role in the prediction of teacher job satisfaction.

Leadership, in the school environment, is an important factor for job satisfaction. Our research confirmed its importance, by showing a direct and positive relation to job satisfaction. The highest score in our research was obtained in relation to leadership that appreciates efficient teaching. The image of the Romanian public school depends also on the efficiency of the teaching staff. This second-highest score was given to the collaboration between leadership and teachers for planning training. Teachers obtain points to advance in their careers by attending various training programs and going through rigorous in-class inspections. Lower scores were obtained for issues such as the leadership’s assistance to the teachers, its willingness to listen to suggestions, and the leadership’s instructional support for the teaching staff. The lowest score was obtained for the issue of the leadership’s equitable treatment of all the teaching staff. This may be explained by the fact that since the school image depends on the quality of the teaching staff, low-achieving teachers may not receive the full support of the school leadership. There is also room for extensive improvement with regard to the leadership’s ability to offer advice on how to improve teaching methods. This issue might be explained by the fact that teachers rely on their own research for the improvement of their teaching methods and styles, while the administrative issues are left in the care of the leadership. Our results are in line with other research that analyzed the relationship between the perceptions of the teachers of school-climate leadership and job satisfaction. Thus, Ainley and Carstens [ 120 ], Torres [ 121 ], Sims [ 122 ], and Liu and Werblow [ 123 ] found a positive relationship between leadership and job satisfaction, i.e., a relationship similar to the one that we identified in our study.

Job satisfaction in the teaching profession is also influenced by the school resources allocated to teachers in the teaching process. Teachers are satisfied with their jobs when they receive the necessary support for using technological material, followed by being provided with the necessary technological resources for the teaching process [ 126 , 129 ].

Collegial collaboration is yet another important factor that influences job satisfaction, especially with regard to collaboration with other colleagues in preparing teaching materials, followed by various consultations aimed at devising better teaching methods. Another important element is the possibility of sharing one’s expertise with fellow teachers and working in teams to implement new teaching-related strategies. In this context, teachers consider it important to be able to collaborate with fellow teachers from other classes, to ensure teaching continuity. Lastly, teachers consider feedback to be a useful tool in self-assessment and professional development. In this context, job satisfaction increases if the working environment is based on honest collegiality. Therefore, we can argue that the results of our study validate the fourth hypothesis (H4). Our results are in line with previous research, such as that of Hur, Jeon, and Buettner [ 103 ], who pointed out that collegiality contributes to increased job satisfaction and leads to positive child-centered beliefs. Furthermore, Yang et al. [ 84 ] pointed out that in Norway and Denmark, professional collaboration has the highest impact on teachers’ job satisfaction, while in Finland no significant effect was found.

The study also revealed that two of the latent variables negatively influenced job satisfaction. Thus, teachers considered that if the workload and school tasks increased, job satisfaction decreased. This is in line with Knox [ 87 ], who found that task significance was an imperative element of job satisfaction, as teachers who perform repetitive tasks are inclined to demonstrate lower job satisfaction and teachers who feel that their job is very important and believe they can make a difference in their students’ lives are likely to have higher job satisfaction. Other studies point out that teachers may have average job satisfaction levels with respect to working conditions [ 54 , 90 ]. However, teachers are aware of the need to perform a certain number of extra duties and that extra workload exists, but if these elements are constant, they lead to attrition, burnout, and even to teacher turnover. The latter element refers to teachers leaving the teaching profession or simply moving to other schools.

These factors influence job satisfaction and well-being in the teaching profession because they ensure a positive work environment in which teachers and students alike thrive, thus leading to higher levels of involvement from teachers, students, and parents. An efficient work environment decreases attrition, burnout, emotional exhaustion, and teacher turnover, while it increases job satisfaction, well-being, and teacher retention.

Practical Implications

Job satisfaction is dependent on school administration and management, the teachers’ relationship with fellow professionals and with the students, and to the greatest extent on personal self-efficacy. If job satisfaction is to be increased, school managers/principals need to ensure that the teaching staff is provided with adequate professional support, access to professional development programs, sufficient teaching materials, and support for using modern technology in the teaching process. The teaching staff need to re-evaluate their relationships and increase collaboration for developing high-quality and efficient teaching materials, adequate feed-back, and support for colleagues who struggle. Teachers should also take into consideration the feedback from colleagues and other teaching staff, and parent and school-management feedback is also useful for better self-evaluation. If these elements are implemented, the school’s work environment can become more efficient and a means through which teacher attrition and burnout can be reduced or even avoided. Teacher well-being would result as a natural consequence of being valued and engaged in school decision-making processes.

In this context, teacher self-efficacy is the most important element for job satisfaction, because it refers to the personal abilities and competences that a teacher can apply in the teaching profession, in any school or educational environment, and also in other fields of expertise that may be relevant. In the school environment, self-efficacy provides the teacher with the ability to optimize and improve teaching methods, teacher–student and teacher–parent interactions, collegial collaboration, decision-making, and the school environment.

The Romanian educational system is highly bureaucratic. Various educational and administrative tasks are based on filling in papers for teaching materials, various committees, administrative decisions, requests, and so on. The system does not always allow for teachers to finish all their teaching tasks in the allocated time frame, meaning that some of the tasks need to be done outside school hours. An increase in workload lowers job satisfaction.

Overall, job satisfaction and well-being are highly dependent on how the school management/principals organize the work environment. If this is done properly, teacher self-efficacy, career promotion/career development, collegial, student, and management relationships, and the proper resources all increase job satisfaction. When teachers are valued for their efforts, fairly praised for their results, have their opinions valued and have a say in decision processes, well-being is increased. Educational/teaching tasks and administrative workload are also highly dependent on how the school management organizes the work environment. These two elements need to be carefully assessed, because if they are excessive, job satisfaction and well-being decrease.

5. Conclusions

This study analyzed the factors that influence job satisfaction in the teaching profession. The factors can be divided into relational factors (i.e., colleagues, students, school management), work-related factors (workload, tasks), and working conditions (work environment, attrition, burnout, self-efficacy). The results of the analysis show that the most important factor that influences job satisfaction is the teacher’s self-efficacy, which is a guarantee that the teaching process, collegial collaboration, the workload, and the tasks are handled properly and efficiently, to which one might add inspiring students with a desire to learn, leading to positive educational outcomes. The second most influential factor is represented by promotion opportunities, which are considered highly influential in job satisfaction because the educational system is organized in such a way as to give access to promotion to teachers that have tenure. This factor is followed by the respectful attitude of students, especially towards teachers, since the educational system has been plagued by negative views from within the media, thus creating higher expectations on the part of society in general, but also parents and especially students. Among the most important factors that influence job satisfaction is the support teachers receive from management, since the deciding factor in how teachers gain access to technology and school supplies depends heavily on how management operates. This aspect brings the argument to the issue of school supplies that aid teachers in delivering high-quality teaching content. The issue is just as important for online teaching, as a mix of online and face-to-face teaching is more prominent than in the past. Teaching is not dependent merely on what one teacher delivers in his or her classes, but also on how collegial cooperation works within schools. If teachers collaborate effectively, job satisfaction increases, since self-efficacy is promoted and developed at a faster pace, thus having positive effects on the educational process. With regard to the workload, it appears that this is expected to exist in higher amounts than might at first appear, since the system is still based on bureaucratic principles. However, if the workload is continuously high, and it interferes with the teaching process, this decreases job satisfaction and can lead to attrition, burnout, and even teacher turnover. Tasks are connected to workload, but they refer strictly to planning, developing, and organizing the teaching process, student evaluation, and class management, and researching new teaching methods, whereas the workload includes administrative chores. When both factors impair the teaching process, this reduces job satisfaction and well-being, by reducing the value and recognition of the teacher’s efforts and results.

Limitations and Future Work

The limitations of this research are due to the number of variables considered. The literature on job satisfaction in the educational field includes several variables that were not included in this study. Variables such as income, background, didactic title, age, gender, and teaching tenure will be analyzed in future research projects. Along with the investigated variables that can affect job satisfaction, there is some evidence that job satisfaction may vary according to a variety of other factors, including personality, demographics, income, work experience, and teachers’ professional status [ 33 , 40 , 50 , 98 , 100 ]. Additional research is being carried out to determine the variability of the aforementioned parameters and their relationship to job satisfaction. Limitations are also due to the number of participants. Although the number is statistically relevant, the group consisted of teachers from the North-West region of Romania only. A more comprehensive study should be performed in other regions, as well as at a national level. We also consider it important to mention that cross-sectional studies imposed some predictive limitations in determining cause–effect relationships. As Carlson and Morrison [ 166 ] stated, “the main limitation of the design of the cross-sectional study is that because exposure and outcome are assessed simultaneously, there is generally no evidence of a temporal relationship between exposure and outcome”. Therefore, we consider that the inclusion of a longitudinal component at country level would be justified for an analysis of trends in teacher job satisfaction.

Latent variables and items.

Factorial loads of the items.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, data curation, methodology, software, validation, formal analysis, investigation, resources, writing—original draft preparation, writing—review and editing, visualization, supervision, and project administration: F.O., C.S. and R.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest in this study.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.