教師職業(yè)倦怠的現(xiàn)狀及其影響因素外文翻譯

1、<p><b>　　外文翻譯：</b></p><p><b>　　原文1</b></p><p>　　Personality hardiness, job involvement and job burnout among teachers</p><p>　　Burnout syndrome occurs i

2、n response to prolonged stress at work place. Burnout is common among those who are unable to cope with extensive demands and pressure on their energy, time, and resources and those who require frequent contact with peop

3、le. The term “burnout” originated during the 1960’s as a description of the effect of drug abuse on an individual (Golembiewski, 1993). However, it lacked definitional clarity until the development of a widely accepted i

4、nstrument for its measurement, the </p><p>　　Maslach and Jackson (1981) defined burnout as a condition characterized by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and loss of a sense of personal accomplishment.

5、 Similarly there has been diverse evidence from scholars on the occurrence of burnout. For example, Maslach and Leiter (1999) indicated that burnout occurs when work load is combined with lack of personal control, insuff

6、icient rewards, the absence of fairness, the breakdown of the working community, or conflicting values. Lee and Ashfor</p><p>　　Numerous work related factors have been found to be associated with burnout amo

7、ng teachers, including excessive time pressure, poor relationships with colleagues, large classes, lack of resources, fear of violence, behavioral problems of pupils, role ambiguity and role conflict, poor opportunities

8、for promotion, lack of support, and lack of participation in decision-making (Abel and Sewell, 1999; Fimian and Blanton, 1987; Friedman, 1991; Wolpin et al., 1991). </p><p>　　Researchers found that burnout n

9、egatively impacts employees’ job attitudes and leads to undesirable behaviors, such as lower job involvement, reduced task performance, and increased turnover intentions (Jackson and Maslach, 1982; Leiter and Maslach, 19

10、88; Motowidlo and Packard, 1986; Shirom, 1989; Wright and Bonett,1997; Wright and Cropanzano, 1998). This study intends to explore the relationship and effects of job involvement and personality hardiness on burnout.<

11、/p><p>　　During the last few years, some personality variables have attracted the attention of researchers in correlation of job stress and burnout. Despite a common acknowledgement that personality factors pla

12、y a critical role in mediating stress, these factors have been overlooked in majority of empirical studies on stress. A notable exception has been a series of studies carried out by Kobasa (1979; 1982a,). Kobasa et al. (

13、1982) explored the concept of “personality hardiness” as a resistance resource</p><p>　　Concept of hardiness focuses on the person that remains relatively healthy after experiencing high amounts of stressfu

14、l life events. Kobasa argues that persons who experience high degree of stress without falling ill have a personality structure differentiating them from a person who becomes sick under stress. This personality differenc

15、e is best characterized by the term “hardiness”. Hardiness reflects the individual’s response to life events both personally and professionally (Kobasa, 1979). Th</p><p>　　higher burnout scores, particularly

16、 on the exhaustion dimensions. </p><p>　　Other conceptual way of describing job involvement is the “degree to which a person is identified psychologically with his work” or “the importance of work in his tot

17、al selfimage” (Lodahl and Kejner, 1965). Such a psychological identification with work may result partly from early socialization training during which the individual may internalize the value of goodness of work. Lodahl

18、 and Kejner (1965) emphasized that during the process of socialization, certain work values are injected into the </p><p><b>　　……</b></p><p><b>　　……</b></p><p&

19、gt;　　Author：Syed Mohammad Azeem</p><p>　　Nationality：Iran</p><p>　　Originate from：International Journal of Vocational and Technical Education Vol. 2(3), pp. 36-40, July 2010</p><p>

20、<b>　　譯文1</b></p><p>　　教師的人格抗壓性，工作積極性和職業(yè)倦怠的關(guān)系</p><p>　　職業(yè)倦怠綜合癥發(fā)生在長期的工作壓力中。職業(yè)倦怠是指那些從事助人職業(yè)的的人無法應(yīng)付外界超出個人能量和資源的過度要求?！熬氲　边@一術(shù)語源自20世紀(jì)60年代期間，是作為個人對濫用藥物的影響的說明（Golembiewski，1993）。然而，知道Maslach倦怠

21、量表被廣泛運用之前它一直缺少明確的定義。</p><p>　　Maslach和Jackson（1981）定義職業(yè)倦怠有情緒衰竭、去個性化和地成就感三個維度的心理狀態(tài)。有很多學(xué)者同樣對職業(yè)倦怠的發(fā)生作了研究。例如：Maslach和Leiter（1999）指出當(dāng)工作超出人的負(fù)荷、不足的報酬、缺乏公平性、較差的工作環(huán)境或者價值觀沖突都會導(dǎo)致職業(yè)倦怠的出現(xiàn)。Lee和Ashforth（1996）認(rèn)為工作負(fù)荷和長時間的工作壓

22、力是導(dǎo)致職業(yè)倦怠的重要因素。</p><p>　　影響教師職業(yè)倦怠的因素有很多，包括過度的壓力、與同事關(guān)系不融洽、師資力量薄弱、擔(dān)心工作不穩(wěn)定性、學(xué)生的不良行為、角色模糊和角色沖突，升職機(jī)會少、缺乏支持以及缺乏參與決策的機(jī)會等。Abel和Sewell（1999）；Fimian和Blanton（1987）；Friedman（1991）；Wolpin等人（1991）。</p><p>　　研究

23、人員發(fā)現(xiàn)職業(yè)倦怠會對員工的工作態(tài)度造成負(fù)面影響，并且會導(dǎo)致不良的行為，比如較低的工作積極性，降低任務(wù)表演并增加離職意向。Jackson和Maslach（1982）；Maslach和Leiter（1988）；Motowidlo和Packard（1986）；Shirom（1989）；Wright和Bonett（1997）；Wright和Cropanzano（1998）。本研究旨在探討職業(yè)倦怠與工作積極性和個人忍耐力的關(guān)系和影響。</p

24、><p>　　在過去的幾年中，一些個性變量吸引了研究人員關(guān)注工作壓力與職業(yè)倦怠的相關(guān)性。盡管普遍認(rèn)為個性因素在調(diào)節(jié)壓力中發(fā)揮關(guān)鍵作用，但是這些因素在大部分的實證研究中都被忽略了。值得注意的是Kobasa等人（1982）在一系列的學(xué)術(shù)研究中探討了人格抗壓性作為阻力來闡述較高的負(fù)面壓力影響的概念。</p><p>　　抗壓性的概念側(cè)重于經(jīng)理的大量的生活壓力事件后心理仍然相對健康的人。Kobasa認(rèn)

25、為那些經(jīng)歷高強(qiáng)度的壓力仍舊沒有受挫的人與那些受挫的人有一個人格特征來區(qū)別他們。這種個性特征定義為“抗壓性：。Kobasa等人（1982）認(rèn)為抗壓性反映了個體獨自面對生活壓力的態(tài)度，他們指出三個因素，分別是：承諾、個體控制力和事件挑戰(zhàn)性。承諾反映了對自己工作的一種奉獻(xiàn)精神?？刂屏κ莻€體確保生活事件一個特定結(jié)果的影響程度。挑戰(zhàn)是人們對待事件的態(tài)度。Simoni和Paterson（1997）認(rèn)為抗壓性強(qiáng)的人應(yīng)付各種壓力，比如個人的生活和家庭的

26、關(guān)系，還有職業(yè)的角色和關(guān)系等，都要強(qiáng)于那些抗壓性弱的人。Rush等人（1995）發(fā)現(xiàn)抗壓性與自我報告疾病之間呈負(fù)相關(guān)。Chan（2003）評價抗壓性和教師職業(yè)倦怠時發(fā)現(xiàn)抗壓性對情緒枯竭和個人修養(yǎng)有重大影響。Crainie等人（1987）發(fā)現(xiàn)抗壓性對減少職業(yè)倦怠有著積極作用，但不會阻止工作壓力而產(chǎn)生的職業(yè)倦怠。Maslach等人（2001）提出那些較低的抗壓能力的人在情緒耗竭的狀態(tài)下，在日?；顒拥膮⑴c、控制能力和改變意識的能力中更容易產(chǎn)生

27、職業(yè)倦怠。</p><p>　　Lodahl和Kejner（1965）指出：描述工作積極性的方法就是在心理上辨別個人的工作積極的程度，或者是他個人認(rèn)為工作的重要性。部分早期社會化培訓(xùn)期間個人內(nèi)在化的工作價值可能導(dǎo)致這種心理辨別能力。他們強(qiáng)調(diào)在社會化過程中，某些工作價值觀會注入到個人的思想中，職業(yè)倦怠對他們以后的工作態(tài)度有著消極的影響，比如減少工作積極性和工作滿意度。Kahill（1988）在一項縱向研究中發(fā)現(xiàn)職業(yè)

28、倦怠會對工作的積極性產(chǎn)生負(fù)面影響。Elloy等人（1991）證明職業(yè)倦怠與工作積極性之間的負(fù)面關(guān)系。Su and Mioa（2006）提出情緒衰竭、較低的個人成就感和去個性化對工作積極性有較大的影響。</p><p><b>　　……</b></p><p><b>　　……</b></p><p>　　作者：Syed M

29、ohammad Azeem</p><p><b>　　國籍：伊朗</b></p><p>　　出處：《國際職業(yè)教育期刊》，2010,2（3），第36-40頁</p><p><b>　　原文2</b></p><p>　　Antecedents and consequences of employ

30、ee absenteeism:A longitudinal perspective on the role of job satisfaction and burnout</p><p>　　A large portion of those who are absent from work for a prolonged time are diagnosed as emotionally exhausted, b

31、urned out, overstrained, or depressed (Houtman & Blatter, 2005). The central element of burnout is emotional exhaustion (Maslach & Jackson, 1986), which refers to a loss of emotional resources and a lack of energ

32、y. In so-called ‘stress’ models (De Boer et al., 2002; Johns, 1997), absence from work is seen as a consequence of stressful work conditions. Workers do not feel able to work, </p><p>　　Iverson, Olekalns, an

33、d Erwin(1998) presented and tested a model in which job satisfaction was considered an attitudinal consequence of burnout , where as absence from work was regarded as a behavioural consequence. Such a model would imply t

34、hat correlations between job satisfaction and absence could be spurious, and are due to third variables, most notably, burnout. Nevertheless, in their study, a negative relationship between job satisfaction and absence r

35、emained after controlling for burnout. </p><p>　　Saxton, Phillips, and Blakeney(1991) examined the correlates of burnout (emotional exhaustion) among airline reservation workers with computerized work in a c

36、ross-sectional study. In contrast to Iverson et al.(1998) , Saxton et al. considered low job satisfaction as an antecedent of burnout rather than a consequence. Moreover, absence frequency was considered a consequence of

37、 burnout. This study tested a model in which burnout could be regarded as a mediator of the relationship between job satis</p><p>　　Although not specifically concerned with burnout, the Hardy et al.(2003) st

38、udy on the relationship between psychological distress and absenteeism is relevant here. This study showed that both general psychological distress and work-related anxiety and depression contributed to higher subsequent

39、 absence. Moreover, they hypothesized and found that job satisfaction and psychological distress were independently related to subsequent absence. Finally, Toppinen-Tanner, Ojajarvi, Vaananen, Kalimo, and </p><

40、;p>　　It should further be noted that job satisfaction and burnout are not measured with validated scales in this study. Job satisfaction was measured with a single item, instead of with an available multiitem scale. B

41、urnout was measured with multiple items that were derived from a validated scale, but used dichotomized response scales instead of the original 7-point scales. Despite this suboptimal measurement, our job satisfaction it

42、em proved to have a high test-retest reliability, which indicates th</p><p><b>　　……</b></p><p><b>　　……</b></p><p>　　Author： Jan F.Ybema, PeterG.W.Smullders,

43、Paulien M.Bongers</p><p>　　Nationality：Holland</p><p>　　Originate from：European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 2010,19(1),102-124</p><p><b>　　譯文2</b>&l

44、t;/p><p>　　員工缺勤的前因和后果</p><p>　　——一個縱向的角度分析工作滿意度和職業(yè)倦怠的影響</p><p>　　Houtman和Blatter(2005)指出：那些長期工作缺勤的人被認(rèn)為很大一部分是情緒耗竭、過度勞累或者情緒低落的原因。Maslach和Jackson（1986）提出：職業(yè)倦怠的核心要素是情感耗竭，這里指的是情緒資源的損失和缺乏活力。

45、De Boer等人在所謂的“壓力“模型下，把缺勤視為工作壓力所導(dǎo)致的結(jié)果。由于員工的主觀的健康狀況，他們覺得不能正常工作，或者嘗試暫停工作來防止壓力或疾病進(jìn)一步的產(chǎn)生。職業(yè)倦怠可能使缺勤成為緩解工作壓力的必要手段。此外，職業(yè)倦怠可能影響滿意度和工作積極性，因此，職業(yè)倦怠可能作為較高缺勤率和較低工作滿意度下的第三個變量。在這項研究中，我們認(rèn)為職業(yè)倦怠作為在工作中的一種心理狀態(tài)欠佳的指標(biāo)，可能再個性特征中造成負(fù)面影響，如工作角色的轉(zhuǎn)換或者身

46、體狀態(tài)變差。</p><p>　　Iverson，Olekalns和Erwin（1998）提出了一種模型，該模型測試的是工作滿意度被認(rèn)為是職業(yè)倦怠態(tài)度導(dǎo)致的后果，而曠工被認(rèn)為是行為的后果。這種模式就意味著工作滿意度和缺勤的關(guān)系不夠準(zhǔn)確，很有坑內(nèi)是因為第三變量職業(yè)倦怠的原因。然而，在他們的研究中，工作滿意度和缺勤之間的負(fù)面影響是職業(yè)倦怠引起的，但是缺勤與職業(yè)倦怠之間只有一個相對較弱的關(guān)系。</p>&

47、lt;p>　　Saxton，Phillips和Blakeney（1991）研究了航空公司機(jī)票預(yù)訂人員和計算機(jī)工程人員之間的職業(yè)倦怠（情緒衰竭）的相關(guān)性。與Iverson等人觀點不同的是，Saxton等人認(rèn)為工作滿意度低是職業(yè)倦怠的原因，而不是結(jié)果。此外，缺勤現(xiàn)象被認(rèn)為是職業(yè)倦怠的后果。這項研究測試了職業(yè)倦怠可以當(dāng)做工作滿意度和缺勤之間的調(diào)節(jié)因素。他們的數(shù)據(jù)似乎確定了職業(yè)倦怠的調(diào)節(jié)作用，但是Saxton等人并沒有明確的實驗說明這個調(diào)

48、節(jié)作用。</p><p>　　雖然沒有實際關(guān)注職業(yè)倦怠，但Hardy等人（2003）研究了心理因素和缺勤是有關(guān)系的。該研究顯示，心理壓力和工作焦慮以及抑郁會導(dǎo)致更嚴(yán)重的缺勤率。此外，他們假設(shè)并發(fā)現(xiàn)工作滿意度和心理壓力跟缺勤率有很大關(guān)系。最后，Toppinen-Tanner等人（2005）發(fā)現(xiàn)職業(yè)倦怠導(dǎo)致因疾病曠工，尤其是精神和行為失調(diào)更有可能是因為較高的職業(yè)倦怠狀態(tài)。</p><p>　　

49、還應(yīng)當(dāng)進(jìn)一步指出，本研究中沒有用驗證的尺度來衡量工作滿意度和職業(yè)倦怠。工作滿意度是用單一的維度來衡量的，而不是一個可用的模型。職業(yè)倦怠用多個被驗證過的項目來測量，但用的是對比的反應(yīng)尺度，而不是原來的七個點的尺度。忽略這種稍不恰當(dāng)?shù)臏y量方法，工作滿意度項目被證明具有較高的內(nèi)容效度，表明它具有一個很高的可信度。如果有什么區(qū)別的話，就是這些可靠的尺度將有可能提高在奔向研究中所發(fā)現(xiàn)的這些因素的相關(guān)性，并可能強(qiáng)化縱向影響。</p>

50、<p><b>　　......</b></p><p><b>　　......</b></p><p>　　作者：Jan F.Ybema, PeterG.W.Smullders, Paulien M.Bongers</p><p><b>　　國籍：荷蘭</b></p>&