|
2017, Cilt 7, Sayı 3, Sayfa(lar) 462-472 |
|
DOI: 10.5961/jhes.2017.223 |
Öğretim Elemanları Algılarına Göre Korku Kültürü ile Tükenmişlik Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi |
Sakine SİNCER1, Gülsün ATANUR BASKAN2 |
1Hacettepe University, School of Foreign Languages, English Preparatory Department, Ankara, Turkey 2Hacettepe University, Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Sciences, Ankara, Turkey |
Anahtar Kelimeler: Korku kültürü, Tükenmişlik, Örgüt kültürü, Öğretim elemanları |
|
Bu araştırmada, öğretim elemanlarının algıladıkları korku kültürü ile tükenmişlik düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır.
Araştırmaya Ankara’da bulunan üç üniversiteden 416 öğretim elemanı katılmıştır. Veri toplama aracı olarak, Ashkanasy ve Nicholson
tarafından geliştirilmiş olan ve bu çalışma kapsamında Türk kültürüne uyarlanan “Korku Kültürü Ölçeği” ile Maslach ve Jackson tarafından
geliştirilmiş ve Ergin tarafından Türk kültürüne uyarlanmış olan “Maslach Tükenmişlik Ölçeği” kullanılmıştır. Verilerin analizinde frekans,
yüzde, aritmetik ortalama, standart sapma gibi betimsel istatistiklerin yanında t-testi, tek yönlü varyans analizi, Kruskal Wallis H testi ve
Mann Whitney U testi, Pearson Korelasyonu ve yapısal eşitlik modellemesinden yararlanılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda katılımcıların korku
kültürü düzeylerinin düşük olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, öğretim elemanlarının, tükenmişliğin alt boyutlarından duygusal tükenme
ve duyarsızlaşma düzeylerinin düşük olduğu ve kişisel başarı algılarının yüksek olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır. Öğretim elemanlarının
algıladıkları korku kültürü düzeyleri ile tükenmişliğin duygusal tükenme ve duyarsızlaşma alt boyutları arasında orta düzeyde, pozitif
yönlü ve istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir ilişkinin bulunduğu, katılımcıların korku kültürü düzeyleri ile tükenmişliğin kişisel başarı alt boyutu
arasında ise orta düzeyde, negatif yönlü ve istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir ilişkinin bulunduğu saptanmıştır. Ayrıca, korku kültürünün
tükenmişliğin tüm alt boyutlarının anlamlı bir yordayıcısı olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır. |
Başa Dön
Öz
Giriş
Materyal ve Metod
Bulgular
Tartışma
Sonuç
Kaynaklar
|
|
It seems that it is inevitable for human beings to be affected
by the feelings they have while they are arranging their social
relations. Fear is one of the feelings, which have serious effects
on human relations and so on society. Nowadays, however, it
is observed that fear is not only a state of mood or feeling but
also a social phenomenon, and even a culture. That’s why fear,
which is a very basic humane feeling, begins to affect our lives
in a negative way. The gloomy working atmosphere created by
the culture of fear dominating the organizations is thought to
cause workers to experience burnout as time passes.
Universities, which are organizations hosting a lot of personnel,
are one of the most important institutions where academic
and scientific knowledge is produced, ideas that shape the
future of societies are put forward, discussed and systemized.
They play an important role in shaping a society’s, a country’s
and the whole humanity’s future in a positive or negative way.
Culture of Fear
It seems to be necessary to wholly understand what the words,
culture and fear mean before addressing the concept of culture
of fear in detail. The concept of culture falls into the scope
of different disciplines such as social anthropology, social psychology,
history, sociology and ethnology, and it is addressed
and described from a different perspective (Arslanoğlu, 2000).
According to Güvenç (1974: 95), culture is a very complex pattern
and it is the whole sum and a function of complex relations
between variables such as society, human being and the
process of education. Koçel (2005: 30) describes culture as the
total sum of people’s goal of life, worldview, language and style
of speaking, understanding of good and bad, attitudes, behaviours,
beliefs, rights and wrongs, the valuable perspectives of
life, interpersonal relations, ways and methods of doing a job
and reaching a goal, understanding of authority and responsibility,
understanding of time, values, perceptions, signs and
symbols shared by people about clothing, appearance, independence
and dependency.
The other element embedded in culture of fear is fear. Fear can
be described on a large scale ranging from a simple feeling of
being nervous to serious feeling of panic (Özyurt et al., 2015).
According to another definition, fear is a mechanism that helps
a person who comes across an unexpected state or event to
focus his mind (Furedi, 2014: 8).
After handling culture and fear, it seems proper to address
culture of fear in detail. When it comes to culture of fear, the
source of all values is determined the type of relation established
between the person and the authority (Cüceloğlu, 2008:
319). Submitting to the authority and doing what the authority
says without questioning him are only few of the basic qualities
created by culture of fear. The person is not only blind to other
ways apart from the one he knows but also far from thinking
of such a possibility.
In a society which is created by people who are far from questioning
and critical thinking, it seems inevitable for people to
alienate themselves. According to Nesin (2014: 9), a person who alienates the people in power and dominating the society
is afraid of social power to crush and oppress him. Nesin states
that the source of this unnatural fear is society, itself.
Fear, which is one of the basic feelings and was formerly
addressed from an individual perspective, turns out to be
a phenomenon that should be handled at a social level as it
affects not only individuals but also great masses by the effect
of globalization, media and education. Culture of fear that
dominates a society is also felt at organizations, which are each
an element of society. Culture of fear, which directs people’s
everyday lives, also affects organizations’ climate.
Appelbaum, Bregman and Moroz (1998) state that there are
a lot of studies being carried out about the sources of fear in
today’s organizations. They list the basic fears in an organization
as fear of organizational change, fear of taking risks, fear
of mistake, fear of success, fear of what others think, fear of
uncertainty and group decisions.
Burnout
Recent years have witnessed a lot of change in economic,
political, cultural and social life as well as values according to
which people arrange their lives. The change experienced in
work life has some different reflections on employees. While
some of them has no difficulty in adapting to the innovations
brought by the change, some others come across a lot of problems
in this process. The ones who cannot cope with these
problems face burnout. According to Freudenberger (1974)
and Maslach’a (1976), who contributed much to conceptualize
burnout, burnout is the product of this rapid change in social
relations.
According to one definition of burnout, which is widely used
and constitutes the basic of most studies about burnout,
burnout is a state about work which is mostly experienced by
people working in service sector which requires employees to
face people, and it is composed of three dimensions which are
emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and personal accomplishment
(Maslach & Jackson, 1981; Maslach & Jackson, 1984;
Leiter & Maslach, 1988). Although emotional exhaustion,
which is focused much and associated with burnout in a way
(Maslach, Leiter ve Schaufeli, 2008), is the fundamental dimension
of burnout, it makes sense to underline the fact that this
dimension is not enough to cerate burnout by itself. Burnout is
an umbrella term that encompasses the three dimensions that
are interconnected even though the relation between them is
not so tight (Jackson, Schwab & Schuler, 1986).
The factors that cause burnout can be listed as personal factors,
organizational factors and job-related factors. Personal
factors that cause burnout are demographic qualities, personal
qualities and attitudes about job (Maslach, Schaufeli & Leiter,
2001; Cordes & Dougherty, 1993). Organizational factors can
also be called as working life areas which help people get
integrated with the job or cause them to experience burnout.
These organizational factors are work load, control, awards,
belonging, justice and values (Maslach & Goldberg, 1998;
Maslach & Leiter, 2008; Maslach, Schaufeli & Leiter, 2001).
Job-related factors that cause burnout can be examined under
two elements which are vocational demands and inadequacy
of sources while it is important to underline that these two
elements are closely interrelated (Maslach, Schaufeli & Leiter,
2001).
Burnout is not a phenomenon that comes out suddenly, but
it is a state that develops (Maslach & Goldberg, 1998). Therefore,
ignoring the symptoms of burnout can have very serious
results (Ardıç & Polatçı, 2008). At this point, it seems crucial to
be aware of the symptoms of burnout in order to cope with
burnout. While symptoms of burnout can differ from person to
person, they can be listed as physical symptoms, psychological
symptoms and behavioural symptoms.
Although burnout comes out because of job-related issues, its
effects and results are not limited to the person’s working life
only. The importance of burnout results from the fact that it
affects people’s life at all points (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993).
It is stated that burnout can have very serious and dangerous
effects on people’s personal life, working life and family life
(Maslach & Jackson, 1981).
As the nature of burnout has been described so far, it seems
proper to focus on ways and methods to cope with burnout.
While there are some ways to cope with burnout at individual
and organizational level, the new approaches put forward
to deal with burnout are based on a holistic understanding.
According to this holistic approach, which was put forward
by Maslach and Goldberg (1998), it is of great importance
to accept that burnout is a real risk whereas it is necessary
to engage with the job by means of establishing a harmony
between the person and working life areas in order to prevent
burnout. Another important quality of this new approach is
that it emphasizes the fact that it is wiser and necessary to take
precautionary measures before burnout comes out instead
of using methods to cure burnout after it appears (González
Romá, et al., 2006). Because of this reason, it seems necessary
to state that a proactive, not reactive, approach is important to
cope with burnout.
Starting from this point, this study aims at analysing the relation
between culture of fear and burnout according to the
perceptions of academics working at different faculties at
three universities located in Ankara. Within this framework,
these questions have been studied to find an answer for each
of them: (1) What is the level of culture of fear and burnout
perceived by academics? (2) Do the levels of culture of fear
and burnout perceived by academics differ at a significant level
statistically according to the variables such as gender, age and
academic title? (3) Is there a significant relation statistically
between the levels of culture of fear and burnout perceived by
academics? (4) How much of the perceived culture of fear can
be explained by the perceived burnout? |
Başa Dön
Öz
Giriş
Materyal ve Metod
Bulgular
Tartışma
Sonuç
Kaynaklar
|
|
Relational screening model, which is a descriptive research,
has been used in this study. The data gathered for this study
have been analysed by using quantitative techniques.
Working Group
The working group of this study is composed of 416 academics
working at Faculty of Education, Faculty of Economics and
Administrative Sciences, and Faculty of Engineering at Başkent
University, Hacettepe University and Middle East Technical
University located in Ankara in 2015-2016 Academic Year. This
study does not have an aim of generalizing the results to the
population. Instead, it focuses on generalizing the qualities.
50.5% (n=210) of the participants are female while 49.5%
(n=206) of them are male. 42.1% (n=175) of the participants
are between the ages of 20-29, 32.7% (n=136) of them are
between the ages of 30-39 and 25.2% (n=105) of them are
over the age of 40. When the participants are analysed according
to their marital status, 51.4% (n=214) of them are married
while 48.6% (n=202) of them are single. 18% (n=75) of the participants
are working at Başkent University, 39.7% (n=165) of
them are working at Hacettepe University and 42.3% (n=176)
of them are working at Middle East Technical University. When
the participants are analysed according to their academic title,
it is clear that 10.8% (n=45) of them are professor doctor, 9.9%
(n=41) of them are associate professor doctor, 17.3% (n=72)
of them are assistant professor and 62% (n=258) of them are
research assistants.
Data Collection Tools
In this study, a personal information form, Maslach Burnout
Inventory and Scale of Culture of Fear, which was adopted into
Turkish within the framework of this study have been used to
collect data from the participants. The personal information
form, which was prepared by the researcher to collect demographic
information from the participants, includes questions
about gender, age, marital status and academic title.
Another tool to gather data in this study is Maslach Burnout
Inventory developed by Maslach and Jackson (1981) and
adopted into Turkish culture by Ergin (1993). While the original
form of the scale is arranged as seven-point likert-type scale,
the Turkish version of the scale is arranged as five-point (never,
rarely, sometimes, frequently, always) because the aim here is
suitability with the Turkish culture.
While adopting the scale into Turkish, test-retest method was
used for reliability analysis and internal consistency coefficients
were measured. Internal consistency coefficient was found to
be .83 for the sub-dimension of emotional exhaustion, .65 for
the sub-dimension of personal accomplishment and .72 for
the sub-dimension of depersonalization. Test-retest reliability
coefficient was found to be .83 for emotional exhaustion, .72
for personal accomplishment and .67 for depersonalization.
Explanatory factor analysis was carried out to determine the
construct validity of the scale and a structure composed of
three factors was reached. These factors are called as emotional
exhaustion, personal accomplishment and depersonalization.
Factor load changes between .38 and .79 for the
sub-dimension of emotional exhaustion (item no 1, 2, 3, 6, 8,
13, 14, 16 and 20), between .37 and .65 for the sub-dimension
of personal accomplishment (item no 4, 7, 9, 12, 17, 18, 19 and 21), between .30 and .78 for the sub-dimension of depersonalization
(item no 5, 10, 11, 15 and 22). While the scale is
composed of 22 items in total, the items belonging to the subdimension
of personal accomplishment are graded negative.
However, as the scale is evaluated on the basis of dimensions
and all the items belonging to the sub-dimension of personal
accomplishment are graded negative, the items do not need
to be reversed.
In this study, internal consistency coefficients were measured
and confirmatory factor analysis was carried out in order to
obtain evidence related to the reliability and validity of the
points gathered with the scale used in this study. Internal consistency
coefficients measured for the sub-dimensions of the
scale were found to be .84 for the sub-dimension of emotional
exhaustion, .73 for the sub-dimension of personal accomplishment
and .72 for the sub-dimension of depersonalization. Confirmatory
factor analysis was carried out to obtain evidence
related to the structure validity of the data gathered within
the framework of this study. At the end of the analysis about
the data gathered from the participants, error variance, factor
load and factor correlation belonging to the measurement
model were found to be meaningful at the level of .05. Thus,
the structure having three factors was confirmed. As a result,
the value of X2/sd was found to be 2.75<3.00 and this value
shows that there is a perfect fit in the model (Kline, 2011). The
value of GFI was found to be .89 while the value of RMSEA
was found to be .065. The fact that the value of RMSEA is <.08
shows that there is a good fit (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993). The
value of NNFI was found to be .94>.90 and this value shows
there is an acceptable fit in the model (Hu & Bentler, 1999).
The value of CFI was found to be .95 and it is stated that if this
value is .95 or over, this shows there is a good fit in the model
(Hooper, Coughlan & Mullen, 2008).
Scale of Culture of Fear, which was developed by Ashkanasy
and Nicholson (2003), is composed of 13 items in total. It is
arranged as seven-point likert-type scale and ranges from “I
totally disagree” to “I totally agree.” The minimum point to be
graded in the scale is 13 while the maximum point is 91. The
scale has only one factor. Internal consistency coefficient of the
scale is found to be .79. In order to prevent the subjectivity
created by the concept of fear, half of the items in the scale are
reversed so that they reflect the feeling of not having any fear.
According to this, items number 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 are graded
negative. Having higher points from the scale shows that the
level of fear is also high.
In order to adopt the Scale of Culture of Fear into Turkish, the
process of adoption suggested by Seçer (2015) was used. This
process comprises 8 steps, which are translation, examining
the translation, back-translation, shaping the first version of
the scale, analysis of language validity, shaping the final version
of the scale, pilot study and analysis of validity and reliability.
During the process of adoption, the suitability of total item correlations
was evaluated and items were amended. 62 participants
participated in the first pilot study and at the end of this
first pilot study, it was found out that there were 4 items whose
total item correlations were under .30 (items no 1, 2, 6 and 12).
After getting opinions of the experts in the fields, the items
were amended and total item correlations were re-evaluated
with the second pilot study. 55 participants participated in the
second pilot study and only one item (item no 1) had a value
under .30. This item had total item correlation between .20
and .30. Seçer (2015) states that if the total item correlation is
over .20, the item should be kept in the scale. Instead, it should
be re-examined. After making the necessary changes with this
item, the scale was used with the real sample.
Structure validity of the Scale of Culture of Fear was examined
with confirmatory factor analysis. At the end of the analysis
related to the data gathered from the participants for this
study, error variance, factor lead and factor correlation were
found to be meaningful at the level of .05. Thus, the structure
having one factor was confirmed. The value of GFI was found
to be .93 while the value of RMSEA was found to be .07. The
fact that the value of RMSEA is <.08 shows that there is a good
fit (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993). The value of NNFI was found to
be .95>.90 and this value shows an acceptable fit in the model
(Hu and Bentler, 1999). The value of CFI was found to be .96.
If this value is .95 or over, this shows that the model displays a
good fit (Hooper, Coughlan & Mullen, 2008).
Internal consistency (Cronbach alfa) coefficient was measured
in order to examine the reliability of the scale points. Internal
consistency coefficient of the scale was found to be .86 and
according to Kline (2011), if the Cronbach Alfa coefficient is
over .70, this is enough to show internal consistency.
Processing and Analysing the Data
The data collected from the participants were analysed using
the programs of SPSS 22.0 and LISREL 8. At the beginning of
this process, negative items among the data were reversed.
Accordingly, the items number 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 in the Scale
of Culture of Fear were reversed. As categories are implemented
in the reversed version in Maslach Burnout Inventory,
all the items in this scale were reversed. The dimensions of
Maslach Burnout Inventory are evaluated independently, so
the negative-graded items in the sub-dimension of personal
accomplishment were not reversed once more as is suggested
by the researcher who adopted the scale into Turkish.
After obtaining the validity and reliability evidences regarding
the points, frequency and percentage values were calculated
in order to investigate the demographic information of the
participants. Descriptive statistical techniques (mean, standard
deviation, maximum and minimum values) were used in order
to analyse the level of culture of fear perceived by the academics.
Also, the gathered data were processed to obtain mean
and standard deviation values for each of the item in the Scale
of Culture of Fear, and frequency and percentage values were
calculated to determine the reaction to each category. Descriptive
statistical techniques (mean, standard deviation, maximum
and minimum values) were used for each sub-dimension
of burnout (emotional exhaustion, personal accomplishment,
depersonalization) in order to analyse the level of burnout
perceived by the academics. The relation between the perception
of culture of fear and the sub-dimensions of emotional exhaustion, personal accomplishment and depersonalization
in the Maslach Burnout Inventory was investigated by means
of Pearson correlation coefficient. |
Başa Dön
Öz
Giriş
Materyal ve Metod
Bulgular
Tartışma
Sonuç
Kaynaklar
|
|
Descriptive statistics obtained to determine the level of culture
of fear perceived by the academics are given in Table 1.
 Büyütmek İçin Tıklayın |
Table 1: Descriptive Statistics Regarding the Points Obtained by
the Academics in the Scale of Culture of Fear |
When Table 1 is examined, it is apparent that the mean of the
points obtained by 416 academics in the scale of culture of fear
is lower than the average (X=2.750). Starting from this point,
it can be concluded that the level of culture of fear perceived
by the academics is a bit low.
In order to determine the level of burnout perceived by the
academics, descriptive statistics were obtained for each subdimension
in Maslach Burnout Inventory. The results can be
seen in Table 2.
 Büyütmek İçin Tıklayın |
Table 2: Descriptive Statistics Regarding the Sub-Dimensions in
Maslach Burnout Inventory |
When Table 2 is examined, it is clear that the mean of the points
obtained by the academics regarding the sub-dimensions of
emotional exhaustion (X=2.190) and depersonalization (X
=1.813) in Maslach Burnout Inventory overlaps with the category
of rarely while the mean of the points obtained from the
sub-dimension of personal accomplishment (X=3.772), which contains items that are opposite to the burnout, overlaps with
the category of frequently. According to this statistics, academics
rarely face emotional exhaustion and depersonalization.
The sub-dimension of personal accomplishment is composed
of items that reflect the effectiveness and productivity of
people and in this sub-dimension, academics mostly state that
they have personal accomplishment.
The effect of gender on the perceived culture of fear is examined
by means of t test for independent samples. The results
are given in Table 3.
 Büyütmek İçin Tıklayın |
Table 3: t-Test for Independent Samples Regarding the Points Obtained by the Academics According to Gender in the Scale of Culture of
Fear |
When Table 3 is examined, it is apparent that the level of culture
of fear perceived by the academics does not differ at a
significant level according to gender [t(414)=.587, p=.557>.05].
Therefore, it can be concluded that there is no statistically
significant difference between point averages of female (X
=2.779) and male (X=2.721) participants.
The level of culture of fear perceived by the academics according
to their age is examined by means of using Kruskal Wallis H
Test. The results are shown in Table 4.
 Büyütmek İçin Tıklayın |
Table 4: Kruskal Wallis H Test Regarding the Points Obtained by the Academics According to Age in the Scale of Culture of Fear |
When Table 4 is examined, it is clear that the level of culture
of fear differs at a significant level statistically according to age
[X2(sd=2)=24.447, p<.05]. When the mean rank is examined,
it is seen that the group having the highest mean is the group
between the ages of 30-39. It can be concluded that the level
of culture of fear is higher in this group than the other groups,
which are 20-29 and over 40. The lowest mean rank belongs to
the group whose age is over 40.
The level of culture of fear perceived by the academics according
to their academic title is examined by means of using Kruskal
Wallis H Test. The results are shown in Table 5.
 Büyütmek İçin Tıklayın |
Table 5: Kruskal Wallis H Test Regarding the Points Obtained by the Academics According to Academic Title in the Scale of Culture of Fear |
When Table 5 is examined, it is apparent that the level of culture
of fear differs at a significant level statistically according to
academic title [X2(sd=3)=18.654, p<.05]. When the mean rank
is examined, the group that has the highest average point is
composed of research assistants. It can be said that the level
of culture of fear perceived by this group is higher than the
level of culture of fear perceived by the other groups (Prof. Dr.,
Assoc. Prof. Dr., Assist. Prof. Dr.) The group having the lowest
mean rank is composed of professor doctors.
The effect of gender on the level of burnout sub-dimensions,
which are emotional exhaustion, personal accomplishment
and depersonalization is examined by means of t test for independent
samples. The results are given in Table 6.
 Büyütmek İçin Tıklayın |
Table 6: t-Test for Independent Samples Regarding the Points Obtained by the Academics According to Gender in the Sub-Dimensions of
Maslach Burnout Inventory |
When Table 6 is examined, it is clear that the points obtained
by the academics in the sub-dimension of emotional exhaustion
[t(414)=1.496, p=.135>.05], personal accomplishment
[t(414)= -1.296, p=.196>.05] and depersonalization [t(414)=
-.601, p=.548>.05] do not show a significant difference according
to gender. So, it can be concluded that there is no significant
difference between the levels of emotional exhaustion,
personal accomplishment and depersonalization perceived by
female and male participants.
The effect of age on participants’ levels of emotional exhaustion,
personal accomplishment and depersonalization was
examined by means of using one-way variance analysis (ANOVA).
The differences between the groups were examined using
Scheffe test as the equality of the variances was maintained
and there was a difference between the samples. The results
are given in Table 7.
 Büyütmek İçin Tıklayın |
Table 7: One-Way Variance Analysis Regarding the Points Obtained by the Academics in the Sub-Dimensions of Maslach Burnout Inventory |
When Table 7 is examined, it seems clear that the level of
emotional exhaustion perceived by the academics does not
display a significant difference according to age [F(2-413)=2.498,
p>.05, partial Ŋ2=.01]. The level of personal accomplishment
perceived by the academics displays a significant difference
according to age [F(2-413)=6.891, p<.05, partial Ŋ2=.03]. According
to statistics, the level of personal accomplishment perceived
by the academics aged between 20-29 (X=3.698) and 30-39 (
X=3.744) is lower than the level of personal accomplishment
perceived by the academics aged over 40 (X=3.930). The level
of depersonalization perceived by the academics displays a
significant difference according to age [F(2-413)=4.946, p<.05,
partial Ŋ2=.02]. According to statistics, the level of depersonalization
perceived by the academics aged between 20-29 (X
=1.875) and 30-39 (X=1.869) is higher than the level of personal
accomplishment perceived by the academics aged over
40 (X=1.636).
The effect of academic title age on participants’ level of personal
accomplishment was examined by means of using oneway
variance analysis (ANOVA). The differences between the groups were examined using Scheffe test as the equality of the
variances was maintained and there was a difference between
the samples. The results are given in Table 8.
 Büyütmek İçin Tıklayın |
Table 8: One-Way Variance Analysis Regarding the Points Obtained by the Academics in the Sub-Dimension of Personal Accomplishment
in Maslach Burnout Inventory According to Academic Title |
When Table 8 is examined, it is apparent that the level of personal
accomplishment perceived by the academics displays a
significant difference according to academic title [F(3-412)=5.591,
p<.05, partial Ŋ2=.04]. According to statistics, the level of personal
accomplishment perceived by research assistants (X
=3.698) is lower than the level of personal accomplishment
perceived by professor doctor (X=4.000).
The level of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization perceived
by the academics according to their academic title is
examined by means of using Kruskal Wallis H Test. The results
are shown in Table 9.
 Büyütmek İçin Tıklayın |
Table 9: Kruskal Wallis H Test Regarding the Points Obtained by the Academics According to Academic Title in Emotional Exhaustion and
Depersonalization |
When Table 9 is examined, it is apparent that the level of
emotional exhaustion perceived by the academics does not
display a significant difference according to academic title
[X2(sd=3)=4.209, p>.05]. Similarly, the level of depersonalization
perceived by the academics does not display a significant
difference according to academic title [X2(sd=3)=7.179, p>.05].
The relation between the points obtained by the academics in
the Scale of Culture of Fear and Maslach Burnout Inventory,
with each sub-dimension, which are emotional exhaustion,
personal accomplishment and depersonalization, was examined
using Pearson correlation coefficient. The results are given in Table 12. According to Büyüköztürk (2011), correlation coefficients
under .30 are regarded to be low, the ones between
.30 - .70 are regarded to be medium and those over .70 are
regarded to be high.
When Table 10 is examined, it is apparent that there is a statistically
significant positive relation at medium level between
culture of fear and the sub-dimension of emotional exhaustion
in Maslach Burnout Inventory perceived by the academics
[r=.581, n=416, p=.000<.001]. So, it can be concluded that
when it comes to culture of fear and emotional exhaustion, if
one rises, the other will rise as well. It is clear from the table
that there is a statistically significant negative relation at medium
level between culture of fear and the sub-dimension of
personal accomplishment perceived by the academics [r=-.382,
n=416, p=.000<.001]. Therefore, it can be concluded that when
culture of fear and personal accomplishment are in question, if
one increases, the other will decrease. It is also clear from the
table that there is a statistically significant positive relation at
medium level between culture of fear and the sub-dimension
of depersonalization [r=.531, n=416, p=.000<.001]. Hence, it
can be said that when culture of fear and depersonalization
are in question, if one rises, the other will also rise.
Structural equation modelling was used in the study to determine
the level of how much culture of fear predicts the subdimension
of emotional exhaustion, personal accomplishment and depersonalization in Maslach Burnout Inventory. The relations
between the variables were determined with the method
of maximum likelihood. Direct relations were evaluated in the
model, in which culture of fear was an external variable while
emotional exhaustion, personal accomplishment and depersonalization
were internal variables. As a result, all t values
regarding structural model were found to be significant at .05
level [temotional exhaustion=13.44, tpersonal accomplishmentı=-5.50, tdepersonalization
=7.88].
 Büyütmek İçin Tıklayın |
Table 10: The Relation Between Culture of Fear and Sub-Dimensions of Maslach Burnout Inventory |
While evaluating the fit of structural equation modelling,
x-square/sd, RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation9,
NNFI (Non-normed Fit Index) and CFI (Comparative Fit
Index) were used. Fit indices obtained at the end of the analysis
are given in Table 11.
 Büyütmek İçin Tıklayın |
Table 11: Structural Equation Modelling Fit Indices Regarding the Relation Between the Scale of Culture of Fear and the Sub-Dimensions
of Emotional Exhaustion, Personal Accomplishment and Depersonalization in the Maslach Burnout Inventory |
When Table 11 is examined, the value of X2/sd was found to
be 2.31<3.00 and this value shows that there is a perfect fit
in the model (Kline, 2011). The value of GFI was found to be
.85 while the value of RMSEA was found to be .056. The value
of NNFI was found to be .95>.90. The value of CFI was found
to be .96. It is stated that if this value is over .95, this shows
that the model has a good fit (Hooper, Coughlan, & Mullen,
2008). According to different criteria regarding goodness of
fit (x-square/sd, RMSEA, NNFI, CFI), it is clear that the model
displays a good fit in general. The results show that the model
is confirmed. The standardized values regarding the model are
given in Figure 1.
 Büyütmek İçin Tıklayın |
Figure 1: Route diagram regarding the relation between culture of fear and sub-dimensions of emotional exhaustion, personal
accomplishment and depersonalization. |
As a result, correlation coefficient between culture of fear and
emotional exhaustion was found to be γ=.71. This value shows
that the effect of culture of fear on emotional exhaustion is high (γ=.71>.50). Moreover, this results proves that there is
a causal relationship between culture of fear and emotional
exhaustion. There is a statistically significant positive relation
between culture of fear and emotional exhaustion. Culture of
fear predicts the variability of emotional exhaustion at a level
of 50%.
Correlation coefficient between culture of fear and personal
accomplishment was found to be γ=-.52. This value shows
that the effect of culture of fear on personal accomplishment
is high (γ=-.52>.50). Moreover, this results proves that there
is a causal relationship between culture of fear and personal
accomplishment. There is a statistically significant negative
relation between culture of fear and emotional exhaustion.
Culture of fear predicts the variability of personal accomplishment
a level of 27%.
Correlation coefficient between culture of fear and depersonalization
was found to be γ=.65. This value shows that the effect
of culture of fear on depersonalization is high (γ=.52>.50).
Moreover, this results proves that there is a causal relationship
between culture of fear and depersonalization. There is a
statistically significant positive relation between culture of fear
and depersonalization. Culture of fear predicts the variability
of depersonalization at a level of 42%. |
Başa Dön
Öz
Giriş
Materyal ve Metod
Bulgular
Tartışma
Sonuç
Kaynaklar
|
|
In this study, the relation between culture of fear and burnout
according to the perceptions of academics working at different
faculties at three universities located in Ankara was analysed.
At the end of the analysis, it was concluded that the level of
culture of fear perceived by the participant academics was a
bit low. This result is in parallel with the fact that universities
should be places where academic can express their opinions
freely although fear combined with panic is apparent all over
society. However, it should be stated that even though fear
perceived at universities is found to be low, this low-level fear
can damage the freedom at universities unless necessary precautions
are taken.
It was also found out that that participants’ level of culture of
fear did not differ according to the variable of gender whereas
it differed according to the variables of age and academic title.
The results show that the participants perceiving the highest
level of culture of fear are between the age of 30-39 while the
ones having the lowest level of culture of fear are 40 years old
or more. While research assistants were found to have the
highest level of culture of fear, professor doctors were perceiving
culture of fear at the lowest level.
It is not surprising that academics who have spent years in
their profession and proved to be successful are not vulnerable
to culture of fear. However, those academics who are yet
at the beginning of their professional life, especially, research
assistants are likely to be more vulnerable to culture of fear.
While the level of burnout perceived by the participants was
found to be low when it comes to the sub-dimensions of
emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, it was concluded
at the end of the study that participants had a perception of a high level of personal accomplishment. In other words, it
seems appropriate to state that academics’ level of burnout is
not at a critical level at all sub-dimensions. When the literature
is reviewed, it is possible to come across some studies that support
the result of this study. Budak and Süregevil (2005), Çavuş,
Gök and Kurtay (2007), Ergin (1995), Özdemir (2001) and also
Tetik (2011) found out in their studies that the participants had
a low level of burnout at all sub-dimensions.
The level of burnout perceived by the participants did not differ
according to the variable of gender at all sub-dimensions.
In literature review, there are some studies supporting the
result of this study. Dağcı and Kartopu (2014), Dolunay (2002),
Gürdoğan and Atabey (2014), Hogan and McKnight (2007) as
well as Maslach and Jackson (1985) found out in their studies
that none of the sub-dimensions of burnout displayed a significant
difference according to the variable of gender.
The level of emotional exhaustion perceived by the participants
did not display a statistically significant difference according to
the variable of age while the participants that were 40 years
old or more had the highest level of personal accomplishment
and lowest level of depersonalization. So, it can be concluded
that younger academics had a higher level of burnout than
the elder ones. Also, the level of emotional exhaustion and
depersonalization perceived by the participants did not differ
significantly according to academic title, but it was concluded
that research assistants had the lowest level of personal
accomplishment while professor doctors had the highest level
of personal accomplishment.
It is apparent from the results that young academics who have
just started academic life with idealistic feelings are more likely
to be dissatisfied with what they see and find about their organization
or profession. It is thought that as years pass, young
academics see that the path to success has some barriers and
difficulties and they are more likely to get rid of burnout as
they gain experience and knowledge in years.
It was found out at the end of the analysis that there was a
causal relationship between the levels of culture of fear and
burnout perceived by the academics. The results show that
there is a statistically significant positive relation between culture
of fear and emotional exhaustion. Culture of fear predicts
the variability of emotional exhaustion at a level of 50%. There
is a statistically significant negative relation between culture
of fear and emotional exhaustion. Culture of fear predicts the
variability of personal accomplishment a level of 27%. There
is a statistically significant positive relation between culture of
fear and depersonalization. Culture of fear predicts the variability
of depersonalization at a level of 42%.
The relation between culture of fear and burnout gives the
signal that culture fear can bring other negative feelings that
will cause failure and unhappiness. In an environment where
culture of fear is dominant, analytical thinking and questioning,
that bring growth and progress, cannot come to life. |
Başa Dön
Öz
Giriş
Materyal ve Metod
Bulgular
Tartışma
Sonuç
Kaynaklar
|
|
At the end of the analysis in this study, the level of culture of fear and burnout perceived by the academics working at three
different universities in Ankara was found to be low. Starting
from this point, although the level of culture of fear and burnout
perceived by the academics is low, it seems appropriate
to look for ways to eliminate culture of fear and burnout at
universities totally, and the necessary precautions should be
taken for this end.
According to the results of this study, mostly younger academics
face the culture of fear and burnout at universities. Because
of this reason, research assistants, who are at the beginning of
their academic working life, should be supported to get rid of
the perception of fear and feeling of burnout. Also, they should
be provided with opportunities that will foster their personal
and vocational development.
When it is considered that culture of fear dominating organizations
is a significant predictor of the level of burnout perceived
by the academics, it seems vital to make the necessary arrangements
regarding managers at organizations. In this context, it
should be an essential prerequisite for the people who want to
be or will be elected as managers to have the necessary education
about administrative sciences and organizational culture.
Moreover, the managers who are in office now although they
have not had such an education should be made to get the
necessary education through seminars or in-service training.
Richards (2003) states that the most dangerous type of fear is
unacknowledged fear. Starting from this point, a peaceful working
environment should be established so that the employees
feel the freedom to share their problems with the managers
when they feel fear or experience burnout at their workplace.
It is thought that the relation between culture of fear and burnout
can be accepted to be a warning against other negative
feelings caused by culture of fear. At this point, other feelings
and phenomena caused by culture of fear should be handled
in further studies. |
Başa Dön
Öz
Giriş
Materyal ve Metod
Bulgular
Tartışma
Sonuç
Kaynaklar
|
|
<1> Appelbaum, H. S., Bregman, M., & Moroz, P. (1998). Fear as a
strategy: Effects and impact within the organization. Journal of
European Industrial Training, 22(3), 113-127.
<2> Ardıç, K., & Polatçı, S. (2008). Tükenmişlik sendromu akademisyenler
üzerinde bir uygulama (GOÜ Örneği). İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler
Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(2), 1-28.
<3> Arslanoğlu, İ. (2000). Kültür ve medeniyet kavramları. Türk Kültürü
ve Hacı Bektaş Velî Araştırma Dergisi, (15).
4) Ashkanasy, N. M., & Nicholson, G. J. (2003). Climate of fear in
organisational settings: Construct definition, measurement
and a test of theory. Australian Journal of Psychology, 55(1),
24-29.
5) Budak, G., & Süregevil, O. (2005). Tükenmişlik ve tükenmişliği
etkileyen örgütsel faktörlerin analizine ilişkin akademik
personel üzerinde bir uygulama. D.E.Ü.İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 20(2),
95-108.
6) Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2011). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı:
istatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum. (15.
bs.). Ankara: Pegem Yayınları.
7) Cordes, C. L. & Dougherty, T. W. (1993). A review and an integration
of research on job burnout. Academy of Management Review,
18(4), 621-656.
8) Cüceloğlu, D. (2008). Korku kültürü: niçin ‘mış gibi’ yaşıyoruz?
İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi.
9) Çavuş, M. F., Gök, T., & Kurtay, F. (2007). Tükenmişlik: Meslek
yüksekokulu akademik personeli üzerine bir araştırma.
Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 16(2),
97-108.
10) Dağcı, A., & Kartopu, S. (2014). Mesleki tükenmişlik ile dindarlık
eğilimi arasındaki ilişki üzerine ampirik bir araştırma. Turkish
Studies - International Periodical For The Languages, Literature
and History of Turkish or Turkic, 9(8), 365-383.
11) Dolunay, A. B. (2002). Keçiören ilçesi genel liseler ve teknik-ticaret
meslek liselerinde görevli öğretmenlerde tükenmişlik durumu
araştırması. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası, 55(1),
51–62.
12) Ergin, C. (1993). Doktor ve hemşirelerde tükenmişlik ve Maslach
tükenmişlik ölçeğinin uyarlanması. VII. Ulusal Psikoloji Kongresi
Bilimsel Çalışmaları. (pp. 143-154). Ankara: Türk Psikologlar
Derneği Yayınları.
13) Ergin, C. (1995). Akademisyenlerde tükenmişlik ve çeşitli stres
kaynaklarının incelenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Edebiyat
Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(1-2), 37-50.
14) Freudenberger, H. J. (1974). Staff burn‐out. Journal of Social Issues,
30(1), 159-165.
15) Furedi, F. (2014). Korku kültürü: risk almamanın riskleri. (2. Baskı).
Yıldırım B. (Çev). İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
16) González Romá, V., Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Lloret, S.
(2006). Burnout and work engagement: Independent factors
or opposite poles? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(1), 165-
174.
17) Gürdoğan, A., & Atabey, S. (2014). Banka çalışanlarının tükenmişlik
ve iş doyum düzeylerine yönelik bir çalışma. Journal Of
Recreation And Tourism Research, 1(2), 14-28.
18) Güvenç, B. (1974). İnsan ve kültür. Ankara: Remzi Kitabevi.
19) Hogan, R. L. & McKnight, M. A. (2007). Exploring burnout among
university online instructors: An initial investigation. The
Internet and Higher Education, 10(2), 117-124.
20) Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural
equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. The
Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
21) Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in
covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new
alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary
Journal, 6(1), 1-55, doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
22) Jackson, S. E., Schwab, R. L., & Schuler, R. S. (1986). Toward an
understanding of the burnout phenomenon. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 71(4), 630.
23) Jöreskog, K. G. & Sörbom, D. (1993). Lisrel 8: structural equation
modeling with the simples command language. Lincolnwood:
Scientific Software International.
24) Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation
modeling. (3. Ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
25) Koçel, T. (2005). İşletme yöneticiliği. İstanbul: Arıkan Basım Yayım
Dağıtım.Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (1988). The impact of
interpersonal environment on burnout and organizational
commitment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9(4), 297-
308.
26) Maslach, C. (1976). Burnout. Human Behavior, 5(9), 16-22.
27) Maslach, C., & Goldberg, J. (1998). Prevention of burnout: New
perspectives. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 7(1), 63-74.
28) Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of
experienced burnout. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2(2),
99-113.
29) Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1984). Burnout in organizational
settings. Applied Social Psychology Annual, 5, 133-152.
30) Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1985). The role of sex and family
variables in burnout. Sex Roles, 12(7-8), 837-851.
31) Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2008). Early predictors of job burnout
and engagement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(3), 498.
32) Maslach, C., Leiter, M. P., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2008). Measuring
burnout. The Oxford handbook of organizational well-being.
(pp. 86-108). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33) Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout.
Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 397-422.
34) Nesin, A. (2014). Korkudan korkmak. (15. baskı). İstanbul: Nesin
Yayınevi.
35) Özdemir, H. D. (2001). Üniversite akademik personelinin görev
unvanları açısından iş tükenmişlik düzeylerinin araştırılması.
Unpublished master’s dissertation. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi,
Sivas, Türkiye
36) Özyurt, G., Öztura, İ., Alkın, T., & Özerdem, A. (2015). Epilepsiye
bağlı anksiyete bozukluğu olgusu. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi, 26(1),
71-5. Retrieved from http://www.turkpsikiyatri.com/PDF/
C26S1/09.pdf
37) Seçer, İ. (2015). Psikolojik test geliştirme ve uyarlama süreci: SPSS
ve LISREL uygulamaları. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
38) Tetik, S. (2011). Öğretim elemanlarının tükenmişlik düzeylerinin
belirlenmesi: Salihli meslek yüksekokulu örneği. Zonguldak
Karaelmas Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 7(13), 339–350. |
Başa Dön
Öz
Giriş
Materyal ve Metod
Bulgular
Tartışma
Sonuç
Kaynaklar
|
|
|
|