The purpose of this study was to indentify the effects of social support and emotional intelligence in the relationship between emotional labor and burnout among clinical nurses. The sample for this study consisted of 382 nurses from four hospitals lo...
The purpose of this study was to indentify the effects of social support and emotional intelligence in the relationship between emotional labor and burnout among clinical nurses. The sample for this study consisted of 382 nurses from four hospitals located in Seoul and Gyunggi province. Data were collected from September 1 to September 22, 2011. Four instruments were used: Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), emotional labor, social support, and emotional intelligence. Data were analyzed using frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation, t-test, ANOVA, Scheffé test, Pearson’s Correlation, Hierarchical Multiple Regression, and Path Analysis.
The result of this study is as follows.
Mean scores for each category were 3.24±0.60 for emotional labor, 3.43±0.69 for social support, 4.84±0.72 for emotional intelligence, and 2.61±0.77 for burnout. There were statistically significant differences between emotional labor and demographic characteristics according to type of hospital and shift (p<.05). There were statistically significant differences between social support and demographic characteristics according to type of hospital and years of working as a nurse (p<.05). There were statistically significant differences between emotional intelligence and demographic characteristics according to age, marital status, education, position, shift, specialty, and years of working as a nurse (p<.05). There were statistically significant differences between burnout and demographic characteristics according to age, marital status, education, position, shift, type of hospital, specialty, and years of working as a nurse (p<.05).
Emotional labor was positively correlated with burnout, while social support and emotional intelligence were negatively correlated with burnout.
The control variables, including age, marital status, working hospital, and working unite explained 14.9% of variance in burnout (F (4,377), p<.001). Emotional labor, social support, and emotional intelligence explained an additional 29%, 4.5%, and 2.6%, respectively, of the variance in burnout. It was statistically significant result that interaction indicators further explained 1% of variance in burnout (F (9,372), p<.001). This combination of factors collectively explained 52.0% of the variance in burnout when controlling for age, marital status, working hospital, and working unite with emotional labor, social support, and emotional intelligence.
Emotional labor (β=.510), social support (β=-.166), and emotional intelligence (β=-.178) had direct effects on burnout for clinical nurses. It was found that social support and emotional intelligence moderated the relationship between emotional labor and burnout. In addition, social support mediated the relationship between emotional labor and burnout, whereas emotional intelligence did not. The explained variance for burnout in mediating effect model was 50.6%.
In summary, it was found that high levels of support had a buffering effect and mitigated the negative effects of the emotional labor on burnout. In addition, nurses who had higher levels of emotional intelligence reported less burnout but showed a stronger relationship between emotional labor and burnout than nurses who had lower levels of emotional intelligence. Therefore, it is necessary to establish new organizational culture through educational programs, enhancing nurses’ personal emotional intelligence, and social support at the organizational level in order to reduce burnout.