A Prospective Study of Personality Characteristics, Occupational Stressors, and Burnout Among School Psychology Practitioners

Journal of School Psychology, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 103–120, 1998 Copyright  1998 Society for the Study of School Psychology Printed in the USA 0022-4405/98 $19.00 1 .00

PII S0022-4405(97)00053-8

A Prospective Study of Personality Characteristics, Occupational Stressors, and Burnout Among School Psychology Practitioners Lane B. Mills Edgecombe County Schools, NC

E. Scott Huebner University of South Carolina This longitudinal study investigated the prevalence and antecedents of burnout in a large sample of school psychologists from a Southeastern state. Approximately 40% of the school psychologists reported high levels of emotional exhaustion, 10% reported depersonalization reactions, and 19% reported a reduced sense of personal accomplishment at Time 1. Cross-sectional regression analyses suggested that personality variables (e.g., extraversion, agreeableness) related to burnout reports over and above stressful occupational events and demographic variables. Furthermore, a multidimensional model of burnout was supported in that there were differential correlates of the burnout dimensions. For example, Emotional Exhaustion scores and Depersonalization scores were more strongly associated with stressful occupational experiences than Reduced Personal Accomplishment scores. The longitudinal data demonstrated the transactional nature of the relationship between burnout and stressful occupational experiences suggesting that not only may stressful occupational experiences predispose individuals to experience burnout, but also that high burnout levels may predispose individuals to experience additional occupational stress. Finally, moderate to high levels of stability were demonstrated for burnout reports over the 7-month time interval, indicating that many school psychologists are chronically stressed on the job.  1998 Society for the Study of School Psychology. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd Keywords: Burnout, Occupational stress, School psychology

Stressful conditions are prevalent in the public schools (Phillips, 1993), however, little is known about the occupational well-being of school psychologists. Several large surveys of job satisfaction have been conducted over the last several decades (e.g., Anderson, Hohenshill, & Brown, 1984; Levinson, Fetchkan, & Hohenshill, 1988; Meacham & Peckham, 1978; Reschly & Connolly, 1990; Smith, 1984). Although studies of job satisfaction address an important component of occupational well-being, researchers Received January 17, 1996; accepted June 10, 1996. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Scott Huebner, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29212.

103

104

Journal of School Psychology

(e.g., Warr, 1987, 1990) have argued cogently for expanded models of wellbeing. Warr’s model consists of affective well-being (which includes but is not limited to job satisfaction), competence, level of aspiration, and autonomy. Such expanded models of well-being provide the opportunity for more finely grained analyses of workers’ responses to their job situations (e.g., see Argyle, 1987). Burnout is a subdomain of occupational well-being that is included in Warr’s (1987) model. Freudenberger (1974) first described this construct. Research on burnout among human services workers has flourished since then. More than 2500 publications were reported during 1974–1989 alone (Kleiber & Enzmann, 1990). The most influential definition of burnout was developed by Maslach and Jackson (1986). Their multidimensional definition includes three components: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment. Emotional exhaustion is characterized by overwhelming feelings of emotional strain. Depersonalization is characterized by a tendency to perceive and relate to clients in an overly impersonal, detached fashion. A reduced sense of accomplishment refers to a conscious judgment that one’s efforts are not achieving the desired outcomes, such as helping others. Burnout has thus been used as an overarching construct including three related, but conceptually distinct dimensions. Findings of differential correlates of the three dimensions have further supported their separability (Huebner, 1993b; Jackson, Schwab, & Schuler, 1986; Maslach, 1993). According to Warr, the personal accomplishment dimension falls within the competence domain of his model, while the former two dimensions fall within the affective domain. Piedmont (1993) states that burnout is most frequently conceptualized as an environmentally derived phenomenon. Given the social and organizational psychology backgrounds of many of the early burnout researchers, it is perhaps not surprising that the majority of empirical studies of burnout among human services workers in general as well as school psychologists in particular has focused on the relationships between environmental (e.g., organizational and interpersonal) variables and burnout dimensions. For example, studies of school psychologists have identified a variety of organizational (e.g., psychologist-to-student ratio, role ambiguity, inadequate resources) and interpersonal (e.g., supervisory support) correlates of burnout (Huebner, 1992, 1993a; Pierson-Hubeny & Archambault, 1987; Reiner & Hartshorne, 1982). Although relationships have achieved statistical significance, the various environmental variables have cumulatively accounted for modest proportions of variance in each of the burnout dimensions (Huebner, 1994). A few studies of burnout have focused on the relationships between person variables (e.g., personality characteristics) and burnout. For example, Sandoval (1993) and Huebner and Mills (1994) have reported personalityburnout linkages in different samples of school psychologists. Nevertheless,

Mills and Huebner

105

these studies and many others failed to include measures of environmental variables along with the personality variables, therefore precluding the assessment of the independent contribution of person and environment variables as well as possible bidirectional influences. More sophisticated conceptual models of burnout have recently been proposed that hypothesize that burnout is transactional in nature. That is, burnout reactions are assumed to reflect reciprocal interrelations between persons and their environments (e.g., Shirom, 1993). Given the limited conceptual frameworks of previous burnout research, the first major purpose of this study was thus to examine the unique contributions of personality and environmental (occupational) variables to the prediction of burnout. We hypothesized that the personality (and environmental) variables would make nonredundant contributions to the prediction of burnout reactions, demonstrating the limitations of previous burnout models that ignore the personality component. Secondly, we aimed to determine if particular personality characteristics related to the three burnout dimensions. In attempting to do so, we sought to represent the major personality subdomains included in current personality taxonomic schemes. Much theoretical and empirical work has converged to suggest that five broad factors adequately reflect the personality domain (Goldberg, 1993; John, 1990). Following the work of McRae and Costa (1990), the five factors include: Extraversion (cf. affectionate, joiner, talkative, active, fun-loving, passionate), Neuroticism (worrying, temperamental, self-pitying, self-conscious, emotional, vulnerable), Openness to Experience (imaginative, creative, original, prefer variety, curious, liberal), Conscientiousness (conscientious, hardworking, well-organized, punctual, ambitious, persevering), and Agreeableness (soft-hearted, trusting, generous, acquiescent, lenient, good-natured). Given the limited research and theorizing related to the relationship between personality characteristics and burnout dimensions, however, specific hypotheses were not formulated. Third, the 7-month stability of the burnout dimensions for school psychologists was explored. Although 12-month stability coefficients of a moderate level (range of .54 to .60 for the three dimensions) have been reported for teachers (Maslach & Jackson, 1986), stability levels for school psychologists have not been explored. Given that we conceptualized burnout reports as reflecting a transactional-ecological system, it was expected that school psychologists’ levels of stability would also be moderate, including both state and trait components. This study also attempted to address methodological issues in burnout research that have been identified by numerous authors (e.g., see Kruger, Botman, & Goodenow, 1991; Schaufeli, Maslach, & Marek, 1993). First, most burnout studies in general and all school psychology studies in particular have been cross-sectional in nature. Thus, inferences regarding the

106

Journal of School Psychology

directionality of relationships among variables have been precluded. Second, most studies of burnout have used self-report scales exclusively to measure occupational stressors and burnout. Observed relationships between environmental stressors and burnout may thus be confounded because individuals demonstrating burnout reactions may be more likely to evaluate various occupational events as highly stressful (Dohrenwend, Dohrenwend, Dodson, & Shrout, 1984). Using a prospective design, the fourth major purpose of this study was thus to determine whether burnout dimensions, personality characteristics, and the experience of occupational stressors were reciprocally related. Transactional models imply that not only should the occurrence of occupational stressors prospectively influence burnout in school psychologists, but also that preexisting high burnout levels should predispose school psychologists to experience subsequent stressful occupational experiences. This study used a prospective design because such a design allows the examination of reciprocal relationships between contextual factors and job adaptation. Statistical controls for the initial level of burnout reactions were also used to insure that the burnout scores at Time 1 did not contribute to the across-time associations between occupational stressors and subsequent burnout scores. In a similar manner, the relationship between occupational stressors at Time 2 and burnout at Time 1 can be examined meaningfully by controlling for Time 1 occupational stressor scores. Such analytical procedures should attenuate the previously mentioned confounding problem. It was thus expected that reciprocal relationships between school psychologists’ experiences of occupational stressors and burnout reactions would be revealed. In other words, it was hypothesized that (a) stressful occupational experiences at Time 1 would predict burnout at Time 2 and (b) burnout levels at Time 1 would predict the experience of occupational stressors at Time 2.

METHOD Procedure Data were collected by mail on two occasions. Survey materials, which included a cover letter assuring confidentiality, demographic questionnaire, occupational stressors scale (School Psychologists and Stress Inventory (SPSI; Wise, 1985), personality inventory (NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI); Costa & McRae, 1985), and burnout scale (Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI; Maslach & Jackson, 1986), were sent in October 1993 to all 509 school psychologists listed in the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction registry of school psychologists. Participants were instructed to complete the survey materials only if they were currently employed as practitioners in school settings (vs. administrators, trainers, etc.).

Mills and Huebner

107

Nonpractitioners were asked to return the materials marked ‘‘not applicable’’ to obtain a more meaningful estimate of the return rate. A second set of materials was mailed 2 weeks later to those school psychologists who failed to respond to the first request. A total of 272 surveys were returned, of which 47 were not applicable. A total of 225 were used subsequently in the data analyses, yielding a usable return rate of 44%. In May 1994, the second wave of the study was undertaken. The Time 2 survey materials included the occupational stressors scale, burnout measure, and a cover letter. Time 2 materials were sent only to the respondents who completed the materials from the first mailing. Again, a second set of materials was sent 2 weeks after the first mailing to nonrespondents. This procedure resulted in the return of 173 completed sets of survey materials, all of which were usable, for a usable return rate of 77%. It should be noted that a comprehensive survey of a single state was conducted rather than sampling from a national pool (e.g., random sample of National Association of School Psychologists [NASP] members) because of: (a) the significant correlation between membership in a national professional organization (e.g., NASP) and one index of occupational well-being, that is job satisfaction (Levinson et al., 1988); (b) the weak relationships between occupational stress and demographic variables, such as type of community (rural vs. urban) and region of the United States (Huberty & Huebner, 1988; Wise, 1985); and (c) the labor-intensive nature of the study, that is, the unusually large number of lengthy questionnaires that had to be completed on multiple occasions. In order to achieve a satisfactory response rate, despite the labor-intensive nature of the study, we decided to survey all school psychologists in North Carolina, the home state of the first author. It was thus hoped that the ensuing sample would reflect a large and heterogeneous group of practitioners, without being limited to members of one national organization. Subjects The school psychologists reported a mean age of 40.3 years (SD 5 9.3) and 10.4 years of experience (SD 5 6.2). A total of 73.4% were females. Levels of training were reported as Masters (23%), Specialist (63%), and Doctoral (14%). The mean school psychologist-to-student ratio was 1 : 2431 (SD 5 1530). Additional demographic data included number of school psychologists on staff (median 5 4), number of schools served (M 5 5, SD 5 4.3), and job location (urban [32%], suburban [29%], and rural [39%]). The effects of sample attrition were investigated by testing for demographic differences between the participants at Time 1 only and those participants who completed the materials for Time 1 and Time 2. Of the six comparisons (age, years of experience, school psychologist-to-student ratio, degree, job location (urban, rural, suburban), and gender), only one

108

Journal of School Psychology

was significant. School psychologists who participated during Time 1 only reported slightly lower student ratios (M 5 1 : 2260) than those school psychologists who participated on both occasions (M 5 1: 2402). Thus, the samples appeared comparable. Measures Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). The MBI (Maslach & Jackson, 1986) is a multidimensional measure of occupational well-being that is composed of three scales: Emotional Exhaustion, Depersonalization, and Reduced Personal Accomplishment. Statements representing these three dimensions of burnout are rated for frequency of occurrence from 0 (never) to 6 (every day). Burnout is represented by higher scores on the Emotional Exhaustion and Depersonalization scales and lower scores on the Personal Accomplishment scale. The Emotional Exhaustion scale measures the degree to which respondents feel emotionally overextended (e.g., ‘‘I feel emotionally drained from my work’’). The Depersonalization scale assesses the extent to which respondents exhibit an insensitive or dehumanized attitude toward service recipients (e.g., ‘‘I’ve become more callous toward people since I took this job’’). Finally, the Reduced Personal Accomplishment scale measures respondents’ feelings of competence and success in their jobs (‘‘I feel I’m positively influencing other people’s lives through my work’’). The derivation of an overall burnout score from the combination of the three scales is not recommended (Maslach & Jackson, 1986). The MBI manual reports extensive normative and psychometric data and has been recommended as ‘‘the best measure of burnout available’’ (Sandoval, 1989, p. 476). Internal consistency has been reported as .90 for Emotional Exhaustion, .79 for Depersonalization, and .71 for Reduced Personal Accomplishment. The 2- to 4-week test-retest reliabilities were .82 for Emotional Exhaustion, .60 for Depersonalization, and .80 for Reduced Personal Accomplishment. Maslach and Jackson (1986) reported significant correlations with behavioral ratings made independently by spouses and coworkers as support for convergent validity. Adequate discriminant validity has been demonstrated by modest correlations with measures of job satisfaction (Maslach & Jackson, 1986) and depression (McKnight & Glass, 1995). The MBI has also been shown to be uncorrelated with measures of social desirability. Additionally, the factor structure has been replicated with a large sample of school psychologists (Huberty & Huebner, 1988). School Psychologist and Stress Inventory (SPSI). The SPSI (Wise, 1985) was developed from the responses of a national sample of 534 school psychologists. The scale consists of 35 stressful events representing such areas as interpersonal conflict, high risk to self and others, time management, and legal issues. In addition to the extensive content validation procedure

Mills and Huebner

109

described in Wise (1985), additional validity data were provided in Huebner (1992). For the purposes of this study, the instructions were modified to read ‘‘Please rate the extent to which each of the items below has been a problem or stressor for you on your job this year.’’ Ratings of the events range from 1 (least stressful) to 9 (most stressful). A composite stress score was created by summing across all the items so that raw scores ranged from 35 (lowest stress) to 315 (highest stress). NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI). The NEO-FFI (Form S) (Costa & McRae, 1985) was used to assess neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. The NEO-FFI is comprised of five 12-item scales that measure each of the domains. This 60item scale is a short form of the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI; Costa & McRae, 1985), which is a reliable and valid scale that has been used in numerous studies of adult personality development. Correlations of the NEO-PI with other self-report scales, such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Costa, McRae, & Dye, 1991), the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory and the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (Costa & McRae, 1990), have supported the five-factor model advocates’ claims of encompassing the dimensions of normal and abnormal personality. Support for the validity of the NEO-FFI is evidenced by the instrument’s high correlations with NEO-PI self-report ratings and NEO-PI ratings by significant others. Factor analyses also support the construct validity of the NEOFFI scales. Coefficient alphas range from .74 to .89 for the five domain scales (Costa & McCrae, 1985). RESULTS The results are reported in two sections. The cross-sectional findings related to the Time 1 (fall) data are summarized in the first section. The longitudinal findings related to the Time 2 (spring) data analyses are summarized in the second section. Time 1 Analyses The mean burnout scores for the current study and the MBI normative data are displayed in Table 1. Compared to the MBI normative sample, which included a total of 11,067 participants from a variety of occupational groups, including educational, social service, medical, and mental health professionals, the school psychologists in this study exhibited greater burnout in the form of higher scores on Emotional Exhaustion, t(224) 5 15.52, p , .01. Additionally, the school psychologists reported lower scores on Depersonalization, t(224) 5 27.71, p , .01, and Reduced Personal Accomplishment, t(224) 5 26.34, p , .01. Compared to Maslach and Jackson’s

110

Journal of School Psychology Table 1 Descriptive Statistics for MBI Scores for MBI Normative Data and Current Study

Normative data M SD Current study M SD

Emotional Exhaustion

Depersonalization

Reduced Personal Accomplishment

20.99 10.75

8.73 5.89

34.58 7.11

24.25 9.63

5.72 4.28

37.33 6.10

Note . Burnout increases as Emotional Exhaustion and Depersonalization scores increase and Reduced Personal Accomplishment scores decrease. M 5 mean; MBI 5 Maslach Burnout Inventory (Maslach & Jackson, 1986); SD 5 standard deviation.

criteria for ‘‘High’’ scores (i.e., scores in the upper third of the normative distribution on the Emotional Exhaustion and Depersonalization scales; scores in the lower third of the normative distribution on the Reduced Personal Accomplishment scale), 40% of the school psychologists reported high emotional exhaustion, 10.2% reported high depersonalization, and 18.7% reported low personal accomplishment. These data are similar to a previous national survey of school psychologists in which the respective percentages were emotional exhaustion (36%), depersonalization (10%), and reduced personal accomplishment (28%) (Huebner, 1992). Table 2 represents the zero-order correlations at Time 1 among the demographic variables, summed occupational stressors, and Big Five personality factors. None of the demographic variables correlated significantly with the burnout scales. In contrast, the occupational stressors score correlated significantly with emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, although not reduced personal accomplishment. Overall, however, the personality variables demonstrated the strongest correlations with all three burnout dimensions. All three burnout dimensions correlated significantly with the Neuroticism factor. Emotional exhaustion also correlated significantly with extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Depersonalization was also related to agreeableness, and reduced personal accomplishment was related to extraversion. To determine the independent contributions of the demographics, occupational stressors, and personality variables, hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted for each of the three dimensions of burnout. For each analysis, the demographic variables were entered as a block at Step 1, followed by the summed stressor score at Step 2 and personality variables at Step 3. Neuroticism was excluded from the personality variable block, however, to eliminate the possibility of criterion contamination, as

Mills and Huebner

111

Table 2 Correlations Among Demographics, Environmental Stressors, Personality Variables, and Burnout Scales at Time 1 Burnout Scales Variables Demographics Age Degree Gender Number of schools Years experience Job location Number of colleagues Student ratio Environmental stressors Summed stressors Personality variables Neuroticism Extraversion Openness to experience Agreeableness Conscientiousness

Emotional Exhaustion 2.08 .03 2.15 2.05 2.11 .01 .09 .10 .47** .50** 2.24** .12 2.24** 2.37*

Depersonalization 2.10 2.01 .06 2.04 2.03 2.05 .07 .07 .25* .34** 2.13 .08 2.36** .09

Reduced Personal Accomplishment .14 .13 .04 2.02 .09 .10 .09 2.10 2.06 2.31** .48** .15 .07 2.09

N 5 225. * p , .01. ** p , .001.

both neuroticism and burnout variables may reflect a negative affect dimension (Watson & Clark, 1984). A summary of the regression analyses is presented in Table 3. For emotional exhaustion, the inclusion of the complete set of demographic variables accounted for a significant amount of variance. The addition of the total stress score accounted for an additional 27% of the variance. Finally, the personality variables accounted for an additional significant increment (10%) in the variance explained, demonstrating that personality variables contribute above and beyond the demographic variables and environmental circumstances. Together, the complete set of predictors accounted for 41% of the variance in Emotional Exhaustion scale scores. For depersonalization, the complete set of predictors accounted for 22% of the total variance. Again the addition of the personality variables block significantly improved the prediction (12%), contributing above and beyond the demographic and environmental variables. For reduced personal accomplishment, the three sets of variables cumulatively explained 30% of the total variation. Neither the demographic variables nor the occupational stressors accounted for significant proportions of variance in the regression equation. Nevertheless, the addition of the

112

b

a

Overall R 2. F for change value. c Standardized beta weight. * p , .01. ** p , .001.

Step 3 personality variables Extraversion Conscientiousness Openness to experience Agreeableness

Step 2 environment variables Total job stressors

Step 1 demographic variables Number of colleagues Gender Degree Age Number of schools Job location Student ratio

Predictor

.41

.31

.10

R 2a

6.69**

51.32**

2.77*

Fb

βc

2.26* 2.06 .09 2.09

.45*

.13 .17 2.06 .06 2.11 .10 .10

Emotional Exhaustion

.22

.10

.06

R2

6.38**

7.65*

1.48*

F

Depersonalization

2.02 2.13 .03 2.31*

.16*

.07 .00 2.11 .02 2.06 2.10 .10

β

Table 3 Hierarchical Regression Analyses for Burnout Scales at Time 1

.30

.06

.06

R2

13.72**

.01

1.64

F

Reduced Personal Accomplishment

.45* .08 .07 2.02

2.02

.10 .04 .05 .11 2.01 .14 2.03

β

Mills and Huebner

113

Table 4 Correlations Among Demographics, Environmental Stressors Time 1, Personality Variables Time 1, and Burnout Scales Time 2 Variables Demographics Age Degree Gender Number of schools Years experience Job location Number of colleagues Student ratio Environmental stressors Summed stressors (Time 1) Personality variables Neuroticism Extraversion Openness to experience Agreeableness Conscientiousness

Emotional Exhaustion 2.13 .08 2.04 2.09 2.18* .04 .05 .02

Depersonalization 2.15 .04 .03 2.05 2.01 .02 .08 .05

.45**

.28**

.43** 2.22** .08 2.23* 2.12*

.23** 2.14 .08 2.25* 2.13

Reduced Personal Accomplishment .18* .15 .06 2.15 2.15 .01 .10 2.20* 2.11 2.29** .42** .11 .09 .19*

N 5 173. * p , .01. ** p , .001.

personality variables significantly improved the R 2, accounting for an additional 24% of the variance. Time 2 Analyses The Time 2 mean scores for the Emotional Exhaustion, Depersonalization, and Reduced Personal Accomplishment scales were 23.02 (SD 5 9.86), 6.14 (SD 5 4.50), and 37.40 (SD 5 6.23), respectively. Compared to Maslach and Jackson’s aforementioned criteria for ‘‘high’’ scores, 37.6% showed high emotional exhaustion, 9.8% showed high depersonalization, and 17.3% showed low personal accomplishment. The stability of the burnout scores over the 7-month period was assessed. Retest coefficients for the Emotional Exhaustion, Depersonalization, and Reduced Personal Accomplishment scales were .80, .62, and .67, respectively, (all p , .001). Mean differences between Time 1 and Time 2 scores on the burnout scales were also calculated, and t-tests revealed no significant differences, thus providing further evidence of the long-term consistency of burnout dimension scores. The mean composite occupational stressor score for Time 2 was 146.20 (SD 5 37.37). These results are comparable to the reports from the Time 1 administration, t(396) 5 0.49, p 5 ns. Table 4 presents the correlations among the Time 2 burnout scores, de-

114

Journal of School Psychology

mographic variables, environmental stressors (Time 1), and personality variables (Time 1). The Reduced Personal Accomplishment scale was related to the variables of age and psychologist-to-student ratio, while the Emotional Exhaustion scale was related to psychologists’ years of experience. Similar to the cross-sectional analyses at Time 1, the summed occupational stressors correlated significantly with the Emotional Exhaustion and Depersonalization scales, but not the Reduced Personal Accomplishment scale. With respect to the personality variables, the pattern of correlations remained similar to that of the cross-sectional analyses of Time 1. Emotional exhaustion related significantly to neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Depersonalization related significantly to neuroticism and agreeableness, and personal accomplishment related significantly to neuroticism, extraversion, and conscientiousness. To examine the independent usefulness of the demographic, environmental stressors, and personality variables in the explanation of the burnout dimensions at Time 2, hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted for each of the burnout scales. For each regression model, the level of the burnout dimension at Time 1 was controlled for by entering the school psychologists’ burnout scores first in the equation. Although this was a highly conservative analytical strategy, researchers (e.g., Dubois, Felner, Brand, Adan, & Evans, 1992) recommend this strategy for longitudinal analyses to avoid the confound of artificial inflation of the across-time predictor-criterion correlations due to shared variance between the predictor and initial levels of the criterion variable. For Time 2 Emotional Exhaustion scores, after removing the contribution of Time 1 Emotional Exhaustion scores, none of the demographic, environmental stress, or personality blocks reached the significance level for inclusion in the model. Alone, Time 1 Emotional Exhaustion scores accounted for 60% of the variation in Time 2 Emotional Exhaustion scores. For Time 2 Depersonalization scores, no additional variables contributed to the model after Time 1 Depersonalization scores were controlled. Alone, Time 1 Depersonalization scores accounted for 38% of the variance in Time 2 Depersonalization scores. Similar results were obtained for the Reduced Personal Accomplishment model, with Time 1 Reduced Personal Accomplishment scores predicting 48% of the Time 2 Reduced Personal Accomplishment score variance. For all three regression equations, the high degree of stability in the burnout scale ratings likely precluded the entry of additional predictor variables into the model. Hierarchical regression procedures were also used to examine the usefulness of the burnout dimensions and personality variables as predictors of the experience of occupational stressors at Time 2. Separate regressions were conducted for each burnout scale and the Big Five personality variables, including neuroticism. Neuroticism was included because criterion contamination was not a concern for these analyses. The experience of

Mills and Huebner

115

prior job stressors was controlled for by entering the Time 1 stressor score in the equation at Step 1. For Time 2 stressors, after removing the contribution of Time 1 stressors, the participants’ scores on the MBI Emotional Exhaustion scale contributed significantly to the model (R 2 5 .05). When exploring the contributions of the Depersonalization and Reduced Personal Accomplishment scales to job stressors at Time 2, neither burnout dimension added significant increments to the equation, after controlling for Time 1 job stress levels. However, when controlling for Time 1 occupational stress levels (R 2 5 .30), the inclusion of the Big Five personality variables block contributed significantly to the explanation of Time 2 occupational stressors (R 2 5 .05), with neuroticism making the largest (β 5 .21) contribution. DISCUSSION First, this study sought to assess the support for models of burnout that consider both environment and person variables. The findings extend previous work through demonstrating that the Big Five personality variables accounted for significant proportions of variance in the burnout dimensions over and above the contributions of demographic and environmental variables. This study thus provides support for conceptualizations of burnout that include a person component in addition to an environment component. Second, this study sought to identify particular personality characteristics that predicted burnout reactions among school psychologists. Specifically, extraversion related significantly to feelings of emotional exhaustion and reduced personal accomplishment, and agreeableness related significantly to depersonalization. The importance of extraversion and agreeableness is consistent with the findings of the previous cross-sectional study of Huebner and Mills (1994). Relating the burnout dimensions to the Big Five variables also illuminates relevant observable behavioral tendencies of school psychologists (Ozer & Reise, 1994). That is, school psychologists who report high emotional exhaustion and reduced personal accomplishment often display tendencies toward introverted behavioral responses (e.g., withdrawn, passive, reserved reactions) while those school psychologists who report high depersonalization often display disagreeable responses (e.g., uncooperative, irritable, suspicious behaviors). Thus, this study provides an enhanced understanding of the behavioral correlates of burnout. Third, this study also investigated the stability of burnout reports across a 7-month time frame for school psychologists. Moderate to high levels of stability were found, despite findings that significant increases in specific occupational stressors have been demonstrated across the school year (see Huebner & Mills, 1997). Such results are consistent with those from studies

116

Journal of School Psychology

of other human service professionals ( Jackson et al., 1986; Piedmont, 1993; Wade, Cooley, & Savicki, 1986) and suggest that burnout reports reflect both state and trait components. The cross-time consistency in burnout reports also demonstrates that many school psychologists begin the year feeling emotionally stressed and end the year feeling emotionally stressed. Fourth, looking across both waves of the study, several important findings emerged with respect to the interrelationships among the burnout dimensions, personality characteristics, and the experience of occupational stressors. To begin with, the simple correlations of the demographic variables, summed occupational stress scores, and personality variables were consistent with previous findings (cf. Huebner, 1992, 1993b). For example, several demographic variables (age, years of experience) related modestly to some of the burnout dimensions. Also, personality variables and current occupational stressors related more strongly to all three burnout dimensions. When Time 1 burnout scores were controlled in the hierarchical regression analyses, however, the demographic, occupational stressors, and personality variables no longer contributed to the prediction of Time 2 burnout scores. This finding does not indicate the absence of possible linkages with burnout reports; the high stability of burnout scores likely precluded the observation of changes in burnout and its hypothesized antecedents. Thus, future studies may need to employ longer intervals between administrations of the burnout scales or use research designs that monitor school psychologists from the very beginning of their careers to adequately investigate antecedent conditions. Additionally, after controlling for Time 1 job stressors, Emotional Exhaustion scores contributed significantly to the prediction of job stressors at Time 2. Thus, not only may an increase in occupational stressors lead to burnout in the form of emotional exhaustion, but also, emotional exhaustion may lead to experiencing additional occupational stress. For example, school psychologists who are emotionally exhausted may become less effective at managing their daily job demands and fall behind on their caseloads and associated work (e.g., paperwork). In turn, this backlog may facilitate increased feelings of emotional exhaustion at work. Similarly, the personality variables, specifically neuroticism, contributed significantly to the prediction of Time 2 occupational stressors. Such a finding is consistent with other research in which neuroticism has been found to predispose individuals to experience negative life events while extraversion predisposed individuals to experience positive life events (Magnus, Diener, Fujita, & Pavot, 1993). Taken together, these data provide support for transactional models of burnout in which there are complex bidirectional relationships between environmental factors (e.g., job stressors) and person factors (e.g., level of burnout). This study also provided further support for Maslach and Jackson’s (1986) multidimensional model of burnout, as there were differential cor-

Mills and Huebner

117

relates of the burnout dimensions. For example, emotional exhaustion and depersonalization were more strongly related to environmental stressors than feelings of low personal accomplishment. In contrast, feelings of low personal accomplishment correlated significantly with several personality variables, specifically extraversion and neuroticism. Such findings suggest that some aspects of burnout may be more related to variations in environmental circumstances than others. Demonstrating that each construct has a different nomological network of relations further indicates the separability of the constructs for school psychologists. Implications for professional practice may be derived from these results. First, given the percentages of practitioners who report high levels of burnout, it seems appropriate that school psychologists pay attention to their well-being. For example, school psychologists, their supervisors, and colleagues should be attentive to the behavioral signs of burnout dimensions (e.g., withdrawal, disagreeableness) and be prepared to provide prevention and intervention services to those in need. Huebner (1993a) provided an overview of a variety of intrapersonal, interpersonal, and organizational strategies that might be appropriate for school psychologists in conjunction with their supervisors. A second major implication of this study concerns preservice training. University training programs should address well-being issues, including emphasizing greater appreciation of the importance of ongoing supervision, understanding of transactional models of occupational stress, and knowledge of effective stress management techniques. Suran and Sheridan (1985) offer a number of interesting suggestions for changing graduate training experiences to facilitate psychologists’ management of burnout throughout their careers. Several limitations of the study should be noted. The use of mail survey methodology allows for relatively large amounts of data to be collected efficiently and confidentially, however, the reliance on volunteers may have systematically influenced the results. Also, although demographic variables contribute little variance to burnout scores (Huberty & Huebner, 1988; Huebner, 1994), the participants represented a single state, possibly limiting the generalizability of the findings. Furthermore, the reliance on selfreport measures of personality, burnout, and occupational stressors requires some caution with respect to internal validity, although recent adult well-being research suggests that individuals are more likely to provide socially desirable responses in situations in which they can be identified (Andrews & Robinson, 1991; Diener & Fujita, 1995; Veenhoven, 1984). That is, individuals may be more forthright when responding to anonymous selfreport questionnaires than alternative formats (e.g., personal interviews). Finally, the exclusion of the personality measure at Time 2 did not allow for a complete analysis of the effects of personality differences on burnout dimensions. Subsequent research efforts would therefore be enhanced by

118

Journal of School Psychology

the use of more complete designs and multiple measures of constructs (e.g., independent reports of stressors, personality). Nevertheless, this study represents the first prospective study of school psychologists’ burnout reactions and thus overcomes many methodological limitations of previous burnout research with this professional group. Future investigations of the specific mechanisms through which personality variables interact with environmental circumstances in the development of school psychologists’ occupational stress and burnout are particularly crucial. Research concerning the relationships among specific coping strategies, personality, demographics (e.g., gender) and occupational wellbeing represents one potentially fruitful pathway to pursue. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors extend their appreciation to the North Carolina school psychologists who participated in the study and Jerlean Noble for word processing the manuscript. REFERENCES Anderson, W. T., Hohenshill, T. H., & Brown, D. T. (1984). Job satisfaction among practicing school psychologists. School Psychology Review, 13, 225–230. Andrews, F. M., & Robinson, J. P. (1991). Measures of subjective well-being. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (Vol. 1, pp. 61–114). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Argyle, M. (1987). The pursuit of happiness . London: Routledge. Costa, P. T., & McRae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory manual . Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Costa, P. T., & McRae, R. R. (1990). Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality Disorders, 4, 362–371. Costa, P. T., McRae, R. R., & Dye, D. A. (1991). Facet scales for agreeableness and conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO Personality Inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 887–890. Diener, E., & Fujita, F. (1995). Methodological pitfalls and solutions in satisfaction research. In A. C. Samli & M. J. Sirgy (Eds.), New dimensions in marketing/quality of life research (pp. 27–46). Westport, CT: Quorum Books. Dohrenwend, B. S., Dohrenwend, B. P., Dodson, M., & Shrout, P. E. (1984). Symptoms, hassles, social supports, and life events: Problems of confounded measures. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 93, 222–230. Dubois, D. L., Felner, R. D., Brand, S., Adan, A., & Evans, E. (1992). A prospective study of life stress, social support, and adaptation in early adolescence. Child Development, 63, 542–557. Freudenberger, H. J. (1974). Staff burnout. Journal of Social Issues, 30, 159–165. Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26–33. Huberty, T. L., & Huebner, E. S. (1988). A national survey of burnout among school psychologists. Psychology in the Schools, 25, 54–61.

Mills and Huebner

119

Huebner, E. S., (1992). Burnout among school psychologists: An exploratory study into its nature, extent, and consequences. School Psychology Quarterly, 7, 129– 136. Huebner, E. S. (1993a). Professionals under stress: A review of burnout among the helping professions with implications for school psychologists. Psychology in the Schools, 30, 40–49. Huebner, E. S. (1993b). Burnout among school psychologists in the USA: Further data related to its prevalence and correlates. School Psychology International, 14, 99–109. Huebner, E. S. (1994). Relationships among demographics, social support, job satisfaction, and burnout among school psychologists. School Psychology International, 15, 181–186. Huebner, E. S., & Mills, L. B. (1994). Burnout in school psychology: The contribution of personality characteristics and role expectations. Special Services in the Schools, 8, 53–68. Huebner, E. S., & Mills, L. B. (1997). Another look at occupational stressors among school psychologists. School Psychology International, 18, 359–374. Jackson, S. E., Schwab, R. L., & Schuler, R. S. (1986). Toward an understanding of the burnout phenomenon. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 630–640. John, O. P. (1990). The ‘‘Big Five’’ factor taxonomy: Dimensions of personality in the natural language and in questionnaires. In L. Pervin (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 66–100). New York: Guilford Press. Kleiber, D., & Enzmann, D. (1990). Burnout: 15 years of research: An international bibliography. Gottingen: Hogrefe. Kruger, L. J., Botman, H. I., & Goodenow, C. (1991). An investigation of social support and burnout among residential counselors. Child & Youth Care Forum, 20, 335–352. Levinson, E., Fetchkan, R., & Hohenshill, T. H. (1988). Job satisfaction among practicing school psychologists revisited. School Psychology Review, 17, 101–112. Magnus, K., Diener, E., Fujiita, F., & Pavot, W. (1993). Extraversion and neuroticism as predictors of objective life events: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1046–1053. Maslach, C. (1993). Burnout: A multidimensional perspective. In W. B. Schaufeli, C. Maslach, & T. Marek (Eds.), Professional burnout: Recent developments in theory and research (pp. 19–32). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Maslach, C. M., & Jackson, S. E. (1986). Maslach Burnout inventory (2nd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. McKnight, J. D., & Glass, P. C. (1995). Perceptions of control, burnout, and depressive symptomatology: A replication and extension. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 490–499. McRae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1990). Personality in adulthood . New York: Guilford Press. Meacham, M. L., & Peckham, P. O. (1978). School psychologists at three-quarters century: Congruence between training, practice, preferred role and competence. Journal of School Psychology, 16, 195–206. Ozer, D. J., & Reise, S. P. (1994). Personality assessment. Annual Review of Psychology, 45, 357–388. Phillips, B. N. (1993). Educational and psychological perspectives on stress in students, teachers, and parents. Brandon, VT: Clinical Psychology Publishing Company. Piedmont, R. L. (1993). A longitudinal analysis of burnout in the health care setting: The role of personal dispositions. Journal of Personality Assessment, 61, 457–473. Pierson-Hubeny, D., & Archambault, F. (1987). Role stress and perceived intensity of burnout among school psychologists. Psychology in the Schools, 24, 244–253.

120

Journal of School Psychology

Reiner, H. D., & Hartshorne, T. S. (1982). Job burnout and the school psychologist. Psychology in the Schools, 19, 508–512. Reschly, D. J., & Connolly, L. M. (1990). Comparisons of school psychologists in the city and country: Is there a ‘‘rural’’ school psychology? School Psychology Review, 19, 534–549. Sandoval, J. (1989). Review of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. In J. Conoley & J. Kramer (Eds.), The tenth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 475–476). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements. Sandoval, J. (1993). Personality and burnout among school psychologists. Psychology in the Schools, 30, 321–326. Schaufeli, W. B., Maslach, C., & Marek, T. (1993). The future of burnout. In W. B. Schaufeli, C. Maslach, & T. Marek (Eds.), Professional burnout: Recent developments in theory and research (pp. 253–259). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Shirom, A. (1993). Burnout in work organizations. In W. B. Schaufeli, C. Maslach, & T. Marek (Eds.), Professional burnout: Recent developments in theory and research (pp. 25–48). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Smith, D. K. (1984). Practicing school psychologists: Their characteristics, activities, and populations served. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 15, 798–810. Suran, B. G., & Sheridan, E. P. (1985). Management of burnout: Training psychologist in professional life span perspectives. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 16, 741–752. Veenhoven, R. (1984). Conditions of happiness . Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel. Wade, D. C., Cooley, E., & Savicki, V. (1986). A longitudinal study of burnout. Children and Youth Services Review, 8, 161–173. Warr, P. (1987). Work, unemployment, and mental health . New York: Oxford University Press. Warr, P. (1990). Measurement of well-being and other aspects of mental health. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 193–210. Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1984). Negative affectivity: The disposition to experience aversive emotional states. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 365–390. Wise, P. S. (1985). School psychologists’ rankings of stressful events. Journal of School Psychology, 23, 31–41.