OCCUPATIONAL STRESS: AN ANALYSIS

Dean Elmuti
Eastern Illinois University

Charleston, Illinois

Yunus Kathawala
Eastern Illinois University

Charleston, Illinois

Sudhir Chawla
Angelo State University

San Angelo, Texas

Introduction

Stress is a part and parcel of modem day life, but the stress in the workplace has
become a major contributor to many diseases in the modem industrial society. Some of
the problems resulting from undue stress are headaches, heart attacks, hypertension, pep-
tic ulcers, weakening of the immune system, anxiety, lack of job involvement, job dis-
satisfaction, and occupational burnout [13]. This relationship between stress and diseases
has had a major impact on American business. It is estimated that it costs about $150
billion annually for health insurance and disability claims, lost productivity, and other
expenses [12].

The term stress is difficult to derme as no universal defmition has been accepted among
scientists and researchers [3]. In general, stress involves the interaction of environmental
stimuli, the physiological and psychological reactions to those stimuli, and coping responses
of the person. Stress can be broken down into two basic components: external and inter-
nal stressors. External stressors can be separated into physical factors, such as low light-
ing, poor ventilation, and taxing physical tasks; and psychological factors such as job or
role demands. Internal stressors are primarily a person's attitudes and expectations through
which stress is placed on the self [4].

Stress can originate from variou-; spheres of a person's life, for example, home, oommu-
oity, job, and soci~conomic conditions of the society at large. Stressors from home and
oommunity conditions are age old, but stressors from the workplace have increased dramati-
cally due to the rapid technological and economic advancement. These are expressed in the
form of many issues such as job satisfaction, job security, participation in decision making,
role in organization, career development, male-female equality, etc. Due to changing state
oompensation laws businesses have become interested in their employees' health because they
may be held liable for a worker's ill health resulting from occupational stress [7].

Another change in the business world is that in recent years women have become a
significant part of the labor force with over half of them employed outside the home at
any given time. Two-thirds of married women in the 25-44 year-old age group work out-
side the home. Even though it is illegal to discriminate against women in the workplace,



2 Journal ofBusiness Strategies Vol. 8, No.1

there are many obstacles to equality of the sexes. The most notable inequality is the
earnings gap between males and females [1].

There is also an enormous growth in younger women entering jobs which were for-
merly dominated by males. As a result female managers are subjected to a greater num-
ber work-related pressures compared to their male counterparts [6]. In their study Davidson
and Cooper found that women in junior and middle management experienced the highest
overall occupational stress levels; followed by male supervisors; senior women manag-
ers; male junior managers; female supervisors, and male middle managers [6]. However,
senior male managers reported the lowest occupational stress levels.

Other studies contradict these results. Tung found that female administrators experi-
enced significantly less occupational stress than male administrators in an educational
setting [15]. Senatra also reported no statistically significant differences between men
and women in job-related stress in public accounting firms [11]. Since most of the past
studies on occupational stress have used exclusively male samples, Beehr and Newman
suggest that sex should be used as a moderator [3].

Among types of managers the group considered to be more vulnerable to occupational
stress are mid-level management. Stress related illnesses are also more common in this
group than among top-level executives [9]. People often make jokes about one, two, and
three-ulcer jobs because it is assumed that when executives reach a top-level in their or-
ganization, they are more prone to illnesses than their subordinates. However, the Bell
Telephone system studies contradicted those assumptions. Top-level executives as a group
were found to be less susceptible to heart attacks than other persons in the company.
The heart disease rate of both the workers and the supervisors more than doubled that of
the executive group [2].

On the basis of this literature review, it seems that marc research is warranted to in-
vestigate male and female differences with respect to occupational stress. Furthermore, it
would be interesting to study the effects of managerial rank with sex differences, as stress
levels are found to be different among different managerial rank. The purpose of this
study then is to investigate the relationship of sex and managerial rank with occupational
stress. The independent variables in this study are sex and managerial rank. Managerial
rank will be varied at three levels, (1) first-line supervisors, (2) mid-level managers, and
(3) top-level executives. Occupational stress will be measured by the 14 scales of Occu-
pational Stress Inventory (OSI) resulting in the three factors or dependent variables.

Hypotheses

The three main hypotheses arc presented below.

1. Therc will be a significant diffcrcnce betwecn groups of malc and female managers
in regard to their mean scores on all three occupational strcss factors.

2. There will be significant differences among the three groups of managers (first-line
supervisors, mid-level managers, and top-level executives) in regard to their mean
scorcs on all three occupational stress factors.



Spring 1991 Elmuti, Kathawala & Chawla: Occupational Stress 3

3. There will be a significant difference between sex and managerial rank in regard to
the mean scores on all three occupational stress factors.

Method

The relationship of sex and managerial rank with occupational stress was examined
using a questionnaire administered to ninety-six male and female managers, employed by
a large multinational corporation in a mid-western state. The goal was to obtain six groups
consisting of 16 male first-line supervisors, 16 female first-line supervisors, 16 male mid-
level mangers, 16 female mid-level managers, 16 male top-level executives, and 16 fe-
male top-level executives.

The personnel director of the corporation was contacted to obtain permission to con-
duct the study and obtain names of managers. Sixteen managers were randomly selected
from each group specified by sex and managerial rank. Once all managers were select-
ed each individual was contacted by phone to obtain their agreement to participate in the
study. In addition, an informed consent form was used to obtain permission of all sub-
jects for their volunteer participation in this study and to allow their results to be used in
a group form. The subjects were assured of complete confidentiality in this informed
consent form.

When fourteen managers refused to participate in the study for different reasons, an
additional fourteen names were randomly selected from those persons' respective sex by
rank category in order to meet our goal of obtaining sixteen managers for each group.
Then the packet containing questionnaires were sent to the subjects along with a pre-
addressed, pre-paid postage envelope. Approximately one week later, the entire sample
was sent a follow up. This procedure produced a total of ninety-six usable questionnaires.

Measures

Occupational Stress.
Occupational stress was measured with Occupational Stress Inventory (OSl). This in-

ventory includes 140 items, and is designed to measure different kinds of stresses people
experience in their work. Responses are on 5-point scales anchored by most of the time
and rarely or never. The OSI has been shown to have acceptable levels of reliability and
validity across a variety of settings. Nonnative data for this 14-scale inventory are avail-
able for 909 adult subjects in 130 different occupations employed primarily in technical
professions and managerial positions. Alpha coefficients for the scales range from .71 to
.94. Since OSI was a published and validated inventory, a total of 100 copies were pur-
chased from Psychological Assessment Resources in Florida. (A list of items in the in-
ventory is presented in Appendix A.)

Analysis of Occupational Stress Inventory (OSI).
The OSI was developed for two primary reasons: 1) to develop generic measures of

occupational stressors that would apply across different occupational levels and environ-



4 Journal ofBusiness Strategies Vol. 8, No.1

ments; and 2) to provide measures for an integrated theoretical model linking sources of
stress in the work environment, the psychological strains experienced by individuals as a
result of work stressors, and the copying resources available to combat the effects of
stressors and alleviate strains [10].

For the purpose of this study, the occupational stress was measured by three major fac-
tors resulting in three dependent variables. Factor 1 was measured by a set of six scales
which were collectively called the Occupational Roles Questionnaire (ORO). The ORO
scales were: Role Overload (RO), Role Insufficiency (RI), Role Ambiguity (RA), Role
Boundary (RB), Responsibility (R), and Physical Environment (PE).

The second factor in our study was the Personal Strain Questionnaire (PSQ) which was
a measure of the domain of psychological strain and composed of four scales: Vocational
Strain (VS), Psychological Strain (pSy), Interpersonal Strain (IS), and Physical Strain
(PHS).

Coping resources was the third factor of the OSI. This factor was assessed by the four
scales which made up the Personal Resources Questionnaire (PRQ). These four scales
were: Recreation (RE), Self-Care (sq, Social Support (SS), and RationaVCognitive Coping
(RC).

Coefficients of internal consistency and median item correlations were also calculated
by applying the Cronbach's alpha formula to provide further justification for utilizing
Occupational Stress Inventory as a multidimensional construct. These were presented in
Table 1 which indicated that a coefficient alpha for each index was above .70.

Table 1

Pearson Correlation Coefficient for Indices of Occupational Stress
Inventory with Coefficient Alpha on Diagonal

Factor MatriX- Factorl Factor

Occupational Roles - Factor 1 (.79)
Personal Strain - Factor 2 .44 (.80)
Personal Resources - Factor 3 .38 .39

Median Item Correlations
Within .44 .61
Between .20 .18

(.77)

.31

.19

• Coefficient alpha are indicated in the diagonal of the Factor Matrix.

The question of how large the coefficient alpha should be for an item to be reliable is
not consistent among researchers; however, some consider alpha at .70 to be a good cri-
terion for adequate scale reliability [5].

In addition, to the scales descnbed above, basic demographic questionnaire including sex,
managerial rank, age, and length of employment with the company were included in the packet



Spring 1991 Elmuti, Kathawala & Chawla: Occupational Stress

Results

5

Demographic characteristics of respondents are shown in Table 2. The average subject
was 41 years old and had 10 years of administrative experience. The median hours worked
per week per subject were 52. A majority (60%) of respondents were married with
children, and the median percentage of total life stress attributed to work was 70%.
Approximately 50% (or 48) of the respondents was female, and 50% (or 48) was male.

Table 2

Demographic Characteristics of Respondents

Percent % Commfot
l. Sex

Male 50 As planned
Female 50

2. Age
20 - 29 22 Average age
30 - 39 40 41 years old
40 - 49 20
50 - 59 12
60 and over 06

3. Managerial Rank
First-line Supervisor 34 One individual occupied
Mid-line Manager 33 two positions at the
Top-level Executive 33 time of survey

4. Service With The Company Average Service
1 - 5 years 30 10 years
6 - 9 years 23

10 - 14 years 18
15 - 19 years 10
20 - 24 years 08
25 and over 11

5. Median Hours Worked Per Week
40 - 45 15 Median Hours Worked
46 - 51 32 Per Week
52 - 57 40 52
58 and over 13



6 Journal ofBusiness Strategies

Comparative Analysis of Stress Profiles

Vol. B,No.1

To investigate the relationship of sex and managerial rank: with occupational stress
factors, a 2 x 3 factorial design was used, (see Figure 1), A 2 x 3 factorial analysis
of variance was also used to analyze the data, with an alpha level of .05 for all tests.

Figure 1
Research Design

Sex
Male Female

First-Line
Supervisor

Mid-level
Managers

Top-level
Executives

2* 5
M Score =(23.62) M Score =(22.00)

n= 16 n= 16

4 1
M Score = (22.18) M Score = (24.31)

n= 16 n= 16

6 3
M Score =(21.06) M Score =(23.00)

n= 16 n= 16

Average mean score Average mean score for
for Male-Managers Female-Managers

(22.29) (23.10)

Avg. mean
score for first-

line supervisors
(22.81)

Mid-level
managers
(23.24)

Top-level
executives

(22.03)

*Numbers in parenthesis indicate the levels of stress experienced by the groups of managers

Hypothesis one predicts that there will be a significant difference between groups of
male managers and female managers in regard to their mean scores on the occupational
stress inventory factors.

To determine the levels of stress experienced by male managers on all three dimen-
sions or factors of Occupational Stress Inventory were compared against those of their
female counterparts (fable 3).



Spring 1991 Elmuti, Kathawala & Chawla: Occupational Stress 7

Table 3

Means, Standard Deviations for the ORQ'l, PSQb,
and PRQc Scales for Managerial Rank and Sex

QlID rsQ. PRQ ORQ. PSQ
&PRQ

Group n M SD M SD M SD M SD
Male

First Line Super. 1 16 9.20 4.75 7.15 2.94 7.37 2.24 23.62 9.57
Mid Level Mgr. 2 16 9.37 3.25 5.62 2.30 7.18 2.98 22.18 8.15
Top Level Exec. 3 16 6.87 2.72 4.75 2.05 10.43 3.90 21.06 8.05

Total Male (1,2,3) 48 9.08 3.20 5.05 2.25 10.14 3.86 22.29 8.17

Female
First Line Superv. 4 16 9.12 3.21 5.52 2.26 5.35 2.99 22.00 8.10
Mid Level Mgr. 5 16 11.62 4.84 7.37 2.99 5.31 2.20 24.3110.15
Top Level Exec. 6 16 10.00 3.80 6.75 2.73 6.25 2.47 23.00 9.45

Total Female (4,5,6) 48 10.25 3.90 6.54 2.59 6.31 2.49 23.10 9.50

• ORQ = Occupational Roles Questionnaire. The ORQ scales are: Role, Insufficiency, Ambiguity,
Boundary, Responsibility and Physical Environment.

" PSQ '" Personal Strain Questionnaire. The PSQ scales are: Vocational Strain, Psychological
Strain, Interpersonal Strain and Physical Strain.

/) PRQ ;:: Personal Resources Questionnaire. The PRQ scales are: Recreation, Self Care, Social

Support and Rational/Cognitive Coping.

Table 4 presents the results of one-way analyses of variance between the male and
female subgroups on all three factors while controlling for effects such as managerial
rank, number of years in present position, and age. Table 4 indicates that the levels of
stress experienced by male mangers on all three factors were lower than that of their
female counterparts. Mean differences for male and female managers on all three factors
are found to be significant with more than 95 percent confidence. This confirmed hy-
pothesis one which led to its acceptance.

Hypothesis two predicts that there will be significant differences among the three groups
of mar.agers (first-line supervisors, mid-level managers, and top-level executives) in re-
gard to their mean scores on the occupational stress dimensions. Table 3 presents per-
ceived Occupational Stress Inventory indices mean scores and standard deviations for male
- fIrst supervisors, male - mid-level managers, male - top-level executives, female - first-
line supervisors, female - mid-level managers, and female - top-level executives. Varia-
tions can been seen for mean scores on all indices. The question is bow significant sta-
tistically are these differences.



8 Journal ofBusiness Strategies Vol. 8, No. 1

Table 4

ANOVA: Male Versus Female Subgroups on aU
Three Factors of Occupational Stress Inventory

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3
Occupational Personal Personal

Catezories Role roRl Strain <PSl Resources {PRl
Total Male X 9.20 5.52 7.43
Total Female X 9.12(.015) 5.15(.52) 5.37(.77)

Managerial Rank
First Line Supervisor

Total Male X 9.37 5.62 7.18
Total Female X 11.62(.096) 7.37(.99) 5.31(.75)

Managerial Rank
Mid-Level Manager

Total Male X 6.87 4.75 10.43
Total Female X 10.00(.90) 6.75(.88) 6.25(NS)

Managerial Rank
Top-Level Manager

Total Male X 9.78 7.25 6.85
Total Female X 9.88(NS) 7.6O(NS) 6.24(NS)

10 Years or Less Years
of Service in Present Position

Total Male X 10.25 7.21 7.10
Total Female X lO.34(NS) 7.4O(NS) 7.05(NS)

11 Years or More
of Service in Present Position

Total Male X 6.88 6.25 8.20
Total Female X 7.12(NS) 6.41(NS) 8.14(NS)

Age « 41 Years)
Total Male X 6.99 5.61 6.40
Total Female X 6.75(NS) 5.2O(NS) 6.2O(NS)

Note: Figures in parentheses are significance levels at P< .05. NS = not significant at P< .05. Age and
length of service using only average age and average years of service at this fum.

To answer this question, the Student's t - statistic was used to test for mean-score dif-
ferences among the three groups of managers on the Occupational Stress Inventory di-
mensions. The t - values were significant at the P=.05 level for all indices. In addition,
Table 3 indicates that the levels of stress experienced by mid-level managers on all three



Spring 1991 Elmuti, Krlthawala & Chawla: Occupational Stress 9

factors were higher than that of first-line supervisors and top-level executives.
Hypothesis three predicts that there will be a significant difference between sex and

managerial rank in regard to the mean scores on the occupational stress dimensions. Table
4 presents the results of one-way analyses of variance between the three groups of man-
agers on all three factors while controlling for effects such as age and number of years
in present position. The reason for controlling for such effects was to make sure that any
difference in means between the three groups of managers could not be attributed to
differences in age nor to number of years in present position. Table 4 indicates that fe-
males in mid-level managerial rank experienced the highest overall occupational stress
levels; followed by male supervisors; top-level female executives; male middle manag-
ers; female supervisors; and top-level male executives who reported the lowest occupa-
tional stress levels. Mean differences for male and female managers on all three levels
of management, (first-line supervisors, mid-level managers, and top-level executives), on
all three occupational stress factors are found to be significant with more than 95 per-
cent confidence. TIris confinned hypotheses two and three which led to their acceptance.

Other findings emerged from this study which indicated that the most clear and sig-
nificant differences between sex and managerial rank in regard to occupational stress
factors were those for Factor 3. The Personal Resources Stress (Factor 3) experienced by
female managers in all "managerial rank," ''number of years in present position," and "age"
categories was substantially lower than that of male managers. The Occupational-Role
Stress (Factor 1), and Personal Strain Stress (Factor 2), experienced by female managers
were significantly higher than that of their male counterparts in all categories with the
exception of the "42 and above" age category. The pattern of scores suggests that fe-
male managers are likely experiencing both emotional and physical symptoms of distress,
in association with doubts about work performance and impaired interpersonal relation-
ships. This pattern of scores on the Personal Resources Stress scales portrays individuals
(mainly females in mid-level managerial rank) who probably have little relief from psy-
chological strain at work, home, or in the social environment.

Conclusions and Discussion

Several significant conclusions seemed to emerge as a result of this study. First, this
research data indicated that the levels of stress experienced by male managers on all
occupational stress dimensions (the Occupational-Role based stress, the Personal Strain
based stress, and the Personal Resources based stress) was lower than that of their fe-
male counterparts.

Second, the research findings also suggested that the levels of stress experienced by
junior and mid-level managers on all three occupational stress factors or dimensions were
higher than that of first-line supervisors or top-level executives.

Third, the findings clearly revealed that females in junior and middle management
positions experienced the highest overall occupational stress levels; followed by male
supervisors; top-level female executives; male middle managers; female supervisors; and
top-level male executives who reported the lowest occupational stress levels. Females in middle



10 Journal ofBusiness Strategies Vol. B,No.1

management positions also did experience significant interference or conflict between work and
home roles. Sixty percent of the female middle managelS felt that they come home from work
too tired to do things they would like to do, felt the demands of their business took away
from their personal interests, and made it difficult to relax at home. Interestingly, marital sta-
tus, age, number of years in present position, and hoUIS worked were not significantly related
to occupational stress levels between male and female managers.

The conclusions from this study may not be generalizable beyond the organization
studied, but they are generally consistent with and tend to support much of the previous
research in this area ([6], [14]). Considerably more research on the relationship of sex
and managerial rank with occupational stress would be helpful for employer and employee
alike. Broader measurements of both individual and organizational outcomes influenced
by occupational stress dimensions should be conducted to develop action plans to mini-
mize or eliminate the stresses and strains in the work environment. Certainly, both attitu-
dinal and behavior measures of the consequences of occupational stress in the workplace
should be investigated across various organizational contexts. Management consultants and
top managelS might also benefit from research producing more substantive information
on: (1) causes of occupational stress in the work environment, (2) problems resulting from
undue stress, (3) impact of undue stress on productivity and organizational performance,
and (4) relationship between the use of social support and feelings of stress and strain.

Although there are obvious limitations to the perceptual and self-reported data collected
in this study, as well as with correlational analysis of such data, this study represents an
effort at investigating the relationship of sex and managerial rank with occupational stress.
Many issues are raised from these findings. With more women entering the male domi-
nated job of management, more female managers are subjected to a greater number of
work related pressures. Females and their family members are required to alter their per-
sonal and family roles, expectations and behavior so that areas of role conflict can be
accepted and more effectively handled [14]. The overall profile of women in junior and
middle management positions in this study suggests that further assessments of stress and
stress interventions are needed.

Practical Applications: A Caveat

Existing research and business practices regarding occupational stress suggest forms of
intervention strategies to minimize or eliminate the stresses and strains in the work envi-
ronment.

On the corporate level, corporations should begin to take more initiatives in providing
employees with training programs designed to help them deal with related stress. Corpo-
rations might choose to provide, for example, wellness and relaxation programs within
their facilities. Exercise releases the body's oWn natural opiates - called endorphins -
that are mood enhancing. The good feeling that comes from a work-out or a brisk walk
is not incidental. That period of exercise affects the body's chemistry by dissipating the
stress and tension and activating the body's natural opiates.

Furthermore, it is incumbent on corporations to develop corporate policies which will



Spring 1991 Elmuti, Kathawala & Chawla: Occupational Stress 11

minimize stress and strain on women in managerial positions. These polices might in-
clude flexible working arrangements, reasonable maternity leave, adequate day-nursery
facilities, and opportunities to work at home.

In addition, family members are needed to provide social and morale support for women
in managerial positions in order to cope with occupational stress and strains in the work
and home environment. Family members will be required to alter their personal and family
roles, expectations, and behaviors, so that areas of conflict can be accepted and effec-
tively managed.

Finally, each person must recognize that stress is ever a part of our lives. We can't
avoid it. Dealing with it emotionally means accepting that we are not always in control
of the work - we cannot make everything right. Dealing with stress behaviorally means
managing time and priorities and paying attention to diet and exercise.

Appendix A

Scale Descriptions and Possible High Score Interpretation
1

Scale Name Interpretation

Role Overload (RO)

Role Insufficiency (RI)

Role Ambiguity (RA)

High scorers may describe their work load as increasing,
unreasonable, and unsupported by needed resources. They may
describe themselves as not feeling well trained or competent for the
job at hand, needing more help, and working under tight deadlines.

High scorers may report a poor fit between their skills and the job
they are performing. They may also report that their career is not
progressing and has little future. Needs for recognition and success
may not be met. They may report boredom and/or underutilization.

High scorers may report a poor sense of what they are expected to
do, how they should be spending their time, and how they will be
evaluated. They seem not to know where to begin on new projects
and experience conflicting demands from supervisors. They may
also report no clear sense of what they should do to "get ahead."

Role Boundary (RB) High scorers may report feeling caught between conflicting
supervisory demands and factions. They may report not feeling
proud ofwhat they do, or not having a stake in the enterprise. They
may also reportbeing unclear about authority lines and having more
than one person telling them what to do.

10sipow and Spokane [10]; reported with permission.



12 Journal ofBusiness Strategies Vol. 8, No.1

Responsibility (R) High scorers may report high levels of responsibility for the
activities and workperfonnance ofsubordinates. They are worried
that others will not perfonn well. They are sought out for leadership
and frequently have to respond to other's problems. They may also
have poor relationships with people at work or feel pressure from
working with angry or difficult employees or the public.

Physical Environment (PE) High scorers may report being exposed to high levels of noise,
wetness, dust, heat, cold, light, poisonous substances, or unpleasant
odors. They may also report having an erratic work schedule or
feeling personally isolated.

Vocational Strain (VS) High scorers may report poor attitudes toward theirwork, including
dread, boredom, and lack of interest. They may report making
errors in their work or having accidents. They may also report that
the quality of their work is suffering. Concentration problems and
absenteeism may be in evidence.

Psychological Strain (pSY) High scorers may report feeling depressed, anxious, unhappy, and!
or irritable. They may report complaining about little things,
responding badly in routine situations, and having no sense of
humor. They may report that things are not "going well."

Interpersonal Strain (IS) High scorers may report frequent quarrels or excessive dependency
on family members, spouses, and friends. They may report wanting
to withdraw and have time alone or, conversely, not having time to
spend with friends.

Physical Strain (PHS) High scorers may report :frequent worries about their health as well as
a number of physical symptoms (colds, heart palpitations, aches and
pains, stomach aches, and erratic eating habits). They may report
unplanned weight changes, overuse of alcohol, and distwbances in
sleeping patterns. They may also report feeling lethargy and apathy.

Recreation (RE) High scorers may report taking advantage of the recreational!
leisure time coming to them and engaging in a variety of activities
which they find relaxing and satisfying. They may also report doing
the things they most enjoy in their spare time.

Self-care (SC) High scorers may report that they regularly exercise, sleep eight
hours per day, are careful about their diet, practice relaxation
techniques, and avoid harmful substances (e.g., alcohol, drugs,
tobacco, coffee).



Spring 1991 Elmuti, Kathawala & Chawla: Occupational Stress 13

Social Supports (SS) High scorers may report feeling that there is at least one person they
can count on and who values and/or loves them. They may report
having sympathetic people to talk: to about work problems and
report having help to do important things and/or things around the
house. They may also report feeling close to another individual.

Rational/Cognitive (RC) High scorers may report that they have a systematic approach to
solving problems, think through the consequences of their choices,
and are able to identify important elementsofproblems encountered.
They may report being able to set and follow priorities, and have
techniques to avoid being distracted. They may also report being
able to reexamine and reorganize their work schedule. They put
their jobs out of their minds when they go home and feel that there
are other jobs besides their present one which they can do.

References

1. Atwater, E. Psychology Of Adjustment Personal Growth In A Changing World. Englewood
Cliffs: NJ.: Prentice Hall (1987), pp. 16-34.

2. Bass, B.M. and Barrell, G.V. People, Work, and Organizations. Boston: Allyn and
Bacon, Inc. (1981), pp. 256-324.

3. Beehr, T.A and Newman, J.E. "Job Stress, Employee Health, and Organizational Effective-
ness: A Factor Analysis, Model, and Literature Review." Personnel Psychology, Vol. 31
(1978), pp. 665-699.

4. Brodzinski, J.D., Scherer, R.F. and Goyer, KA. "Workplace Stress." Personnel Administra-
tion, (July 1989), pp. 76-80.

5. Cronback, LJ. "Coefficient Alpha and The Internal Structure of Tests." Psychometrika, Vol.
6 (September 1951), pp. 297-334.

6. Davidson, MJ. and Cooper, C.L. "Occupational Stress In Female Managers: A Comparative
Study. Journal Of Management Studies, Vol. 21 (1984), pp. 185-205.

7. Greenberg, J.S. Comprehensive Stress Management. Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown
Publishers (1987) pp. 278-214.

8. Gunderson, M. "Male-Female Wage Differentials and Policy Responses." Journal of Economic
Litemture (March 1989), pp. 43-72.

9. Maier, N.R.F. and Verser, G.C. Psychology In Industrial Organizations. Boston: Houghton
Miffin· Company (1982), pp. 218-236.



14 Journal ofBusiness Strategies Vol. 8, No.1

10. Osipow, S.H. and Spokane, AR. Occuptational Stress Inventory. Research. Version, Odessa,
Florida: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc., (1987), pp. 2-5.

11. Senatra, P. "What Are The Sources And Consequences Of Stress? Do Men And Women
Differ In Their Perceptions?" The Woman CPA (July 1988), pp. 13-15.

12. Smith, E.T., Brott, J., Cuneo, A and Davis, J. "Stress: The Test Americans Are Failing."
Business Week (April 1988), pp. 74-78.

13. Spector, P.E., Dwyer, DJ. and Jex, S.M. "Relation Of Job Stressors To Affective, Health,
And Performance Outcomes: A Comparison Of Multiple Data Sources." Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol 73 (1988), pp. 11-19.

14. Stoner, C.R., Hartman, R.I. and Arora, R. "Work-Home Role Conflict In Female Owners Of
Small Business: An Exploratory Study." Journal of Small Business Management (January
1990), pp. 30-38.

15. Tung, R. "Comparative Analysis Of The Occupational Stress Profiles Of Male Versus Fe-
male Administrators. Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 17 (1980), pp. 344-355.


	Occupational Stress: An Analysis