mday/jury 1/artifact 2 - epfr 501 chapters... · web viewcircumstance, multiple strategies can be...

Running head: Effectiveness of Training and Reduction of Stress

Effectiveness of Safety Training and the Reduction of Job Stress

Micah Day

Southern Illinois University Edwardsville

Effectiveness of Training and Reduction of Stress

Table of Contents

Page

List of Tables and Figures 3

Abstract 4

Introduction 5

Background and Significance 5

Statement of the problem 5

Literature Review 6

Rationale of the Study 9

Statement of the Hypothesis 9

Methods 9

Participants 9

Instruments 10

Qualitative Research Design 11

Procedure 12

Data Analysis Plan 12

Time Schedule 13

References 15

2


List of Tables and Figures

Tables Page

1. Motivated and Unmotivated Groups 12

2. Time Schedule 13

Figures

1. Demographics 16

3


Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of safety training and the

perception of job stress. Using a prospective casual-comparative experimental design and a t test

for independent samples, results found that participants within the experimental group (n= 40),

that were motivated to undergo training had a significantly lower amount of perceived job stress

on the Job Scale Survey, as well as the Health and Safety Attitude Survey than the control group

(n= 40). It was concluded that effective safety training when correlated with motivation reduces

perceived job stress.

4


Introduction

Background and Significance

Within the work place, multiple studies have been conducted, focusing on stress

management and stress reduction, also known as stress intervention. These styles of stress

intervention coincide with the task of reducing job stress. The existence of stress within a

work place is inevitable; however, the levels of stress perceived within a work place can be

manageable.

One way in which stress can be managed is through the intervention of safety training.

Safety training, in present research, has proven to increase job performance, as well as

increase job productivity and sales. Other benefits corresponding with safety training include

the prevention of job-related diseases and accidents. An underlying factor, aiding in the

success of most safety training studies, is the variable of motivation and attitudes (Morrison,

2011).

Unfortunately, research pertaining to safety intervention and the effect of

perceived job stress has been limited (Kiam, 2012). However, further research exploring this

topic could possibly yield significant findings relating to how safety training has an effect of job

stress.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this study’s to investigate the effect of safety training on job stress.

5


Safety training within many circumstances, reduces safety incidents, and is compliant with

transforming safety culture. However, job stress, by definition, is the harmfully physical and

emotional response occurring from a poor match between job demands and capabilities/resources

within a work place (Khalathari, 2011).

Literature Review

Stress, a cognitive and physiological response, occurs when an individual feels specific

challenges or circumstances exceeding their coping skills. When stress is compared to

particular components or elements of a work environment, this stressor is referred to as job stress

(Kiam, Samavtyan, Poorabdiyan, & Jafari, 2012). Job stress is not a rare phenomenon, nor mal-

researched. Three stressors are associated with job stress, job factors, individual factors, and

organizational factors; each responsible for enhancing an individual’s level of stress within a job

or work environment. Tendencies of individuals displaying higher levels of job stress generally

have a greater risk of encountering occupational accidents. Kiam et. al, provides significant

evidence of relationships existing, linking job stress to incidence of accidents. Underlying the

issue of job stress and occupational accidents, attitudes of employees towards safety issues are

questioned. Can attitudes, concerning safety issues, predict the outcome or influence variables

contributing to the prevalence of accidents? Or will a new systematic approach, entailing new

management or redesigning of the system, provide stress reduction (Blair & Seo, 2007)?

Simplistic in nature, the term safety attitude refers to the beliefs, values, and emotions

circulating safety issues (Blair & Seo, 2007). Reflecting characteristics of responsibility and

commitment towards safety issues, safety attitudes can be useful in the evaluation of effective

safety training (Kiam, 2012). Determining the effectiveness of a safety training program,

several variables must be taken into consideration. Blair defines safety training as being

6


a structured activity, emphasizing on instilling consistent reproductive behaviors, minimalizing

or exempting variations, which will increase efficiency, providing greater work conditions.

Safety training aims to facilitate learning, ideally encouraging workers to become

knowledgeable of their profession. Training attempts to inhibit workers with new skills,

enabling the worker to transfer their new skills into performing tasks in a specific way.

However, this transfer process must be approached delicately, eliminating possibilities of

retrogressive tendencies. Typically, inadequacy issues towards safety training will occur when

management either does not conduct safety training, when safety training is conducted but

ineffective, or when training is delivered well but not integrated within the workplace.

These management styles, overall are ineffective and counterproductive. For training to

improve performance, the new behaviors must be engrained into the work culture through the

support of management. After all, “application is the catalyst for learning that enables the

learner to become fluent” (Blair & Seo, 2007, 47). Even the most impressive of training

pitches/deliveries can be determined as ineffective if the knowledge and skills learned

do not transfer to the workplace.

Performance appears to be a determinant variable, depicting whether training

intervention will be effective or successful. Perceived as an individual level variable,

performance influences several aspects within an organization or industry (Ali et. al, 2011).

Encompassing positive relationships between job stress and employee commitment, employee

commitment positively relates to performance. Converted through training, training is

considered nothing more than an activity, however, performance is a combination of a

training activity, integrating a desired behavior, attained through ongoing achievement or

expectations (Blair & Seo, 2007). Focusing on transferrable training, an appropriate

7


enforcement on activities should be implemented. Enforcing activities related to safety training

will allow individuals to maintain skills learned within training, reducing performance issues

contributing to occupational incidents. Embedding this concept of safety training, pertaining to

enforcing activities, into an organizations culture will ideally improve individual performance.

Despite the effectiveness of most safety training interventions exemplifying stress

Reduction, some safety training interventions can also foster stress (Blair & Seo, 2007).

Perceived as being the solution to every safety performance issue, occasionally perception of

safety training can be counterproductive. Blair states that failure to solve the real problem

existing within an organization through safety training interventions, can cause overtraining and

irrelevant training to occur. Both occurrences, whether overtraining or irrelevant training,

contributing to job stress, results in lower job satisfaction (Ali et. al, 2011). Depending on the

circumstance, multiple strategies can be used to intervene with employee motivation or

performance. Blair suggests worker engagement, individual coaching, and improving working

conditions can be just as successful as safety training.

A primary example of an effective training intervention reducing stress can be

annotated from Kiam’s study. Kiam (2012) conducted a study on effective safety

training interventions and the reduction on job stress. Using a stratified random sampling

method, participants were randomly assigned to a control group, stemming from an industrial

company. Fifty participants were selected, differing in subgroups and classes. Half the

participants received training, while the other half was not given training. Within the study,

safety attitudes were assessed through self-report/perception inventories. Reporting a

significance level of .05, between alleged job stress and attitudes towards safety, the training

group and non-trained group (control group) results, differed significantly in attitudes towards

8


safety issues. Pre-measured and post-measured tests were given to participants within the

training and control group, resulting in another significant finding, inferring differences in

perceived job stress between the two groups does exist. A third significant finding was also

found, stating safety training did have a positive effect on attitudes towards safety issues (p =

.36). Thus, inferring the training intervention was not a visible predicator of stress (P = -.24).

Rationale for the Study

Referencing Kiam and colleagues, Ali and colleagues, as well as Blair and Sue’s research

Studies on the effectiveness of safety training within the workplace, it is feasible to claim that

job Stress is reduced when employees receive effective and integrated safety training

interventions. Whether results were inducted or deducted through differing methods

(quantitative and qualitative), each study rendered a significant correlation between safety

training and job stress. Rational conceptually, when an individual has a reduction in concerns

within a workplace or worksite, unknown/extraneous variables are removed from, or controlled

within the Environment; therefore, reducing perceived job stress.

Research Hypothesis

Kiam’s (2012) previous study, researched the effects of safety training on job stress;

however, it was not clear whether or not safety training reduced job stress. Instead, emergent

questions concerning the mediators or variable of motivation and attitudes surfaced. These two

variables play a critical role within the success of safety training (Morrison, 2011). However,

does motivation or a presiding attitude have a stronger impact on the reduction of job stress? Or

does a successful safety training program provide skills essential for relieving employees of

different stressors associated with work? Therefore, it is hypothesized specifically that people

who are motivated towards receiving effective safety training program/intervention will have

9


less perceived job stress than their counterparts who are not motivated to receive safety training.

Method

Participants

Participants for this study will be recruited using convenience sampling through the

dispersal of questionnaires, given to food servicing employees, in the Morris University Center,

Vadalabene Center and the Skywalk Cafe at Southern Illinois University Edwardsville’s

campus, population of about 17,000 students, in Edwardsville, Illinois. The criteria of the

participants consisted of being currently employed, receiving some form of safety training prior

to working at their place of employment.

Eighty participants will be selected and grouped into one of two categories. All

participants will be eighteen or older. Participants will need to have received a high school

diploma, working in a food service area on Southern Illinois University Edwardsville campus.

There might be a slight difference in participants concerning gender; however, the male to

female ratio should almost be equivalent to one another.

Instruments

The effectiveness of safety training will be measured by an attitude survey, known as the

Health and Safety Attitude Survey (a nationwide used survey). Consisting of 22 items, scored on

a four point scale from strongly agree, agree, and disagree, to strongly disagree, the Health and

Safety Attitude Survey will measure thirteen components: “work conscientiousness, fatalism,

leadership, safety consciousness, role overload, work pressure, job safety perception, supervisor

safety perception, coworker safety perception, management safety perception, safety program

and policies perception, interpersonal conflicts at work and job involvement” (Bureau of State

Risk Management).

Determining the employees’ level of stress, the Job Stress Survey (JSS) will be utilized to

survey the amount of self-perceived stress felt by participants (Pinkney, 1999). Yielding

10


significant findings, concerning validity and reliability, validity scores of the JSS constitute that

the JS-X scale (Job Satisfaction) yields a score of -.52, and the LS-F scale (Level of perceived

job stress frequency) yields a score of -.66. The internal consistency, form of reliability

measured for the JSS renders a significance level of .77 to .93; while the test-retest yields a

level of .48 to .75. Being known as a widely used psychological instrument for measuring job

stress, the JSS requires a minimum of a junior high school education. This basic comprehensive

test is aimed towards adults of all ages, asking questions directly towards experienced job stress,

severity and frequency of mishap or injury occurrences, and organizational support (Pinkney,

1999). This survey consists of 60 items, using a 0-9 scale, with 10 subscales. A sample item

within the survey is, “in the last month, how often have you felt nervous and stressed” (Pinkley,

1999, 450).

Quantitative Research Design

Assessing the likelihood that effective safety training can reduce job stress emerges a

question, is effective training the reason to why job stress is less in certain work environments?

Seeming how an affect for each participant has formed (motivated or unmotivated), this study

will indicate whether this cause renders an-effect occurring from the job stress questionnaires.

Each group, whether experimental or controlled, are homogenous in multiple facets, however,

their predisposition lies in their attitudes towards safety training. All participants will be student-

faculty based, sampling individuals from fast food services/eateries. Possibly varying in

backgrounds (education, culture, ethnicity), the data from the questionnaires will render if there

were any correlations or differences involving differences in backgrounds. This will be achieved

through the comparison of homogenous groups and subgroups.

A prospective casual-comparative research design will be used, attempting to identify

cause-effect relationships. Not manipulating the independent variable, the researcher’s control

will be limited. However, the participants will not be randomly assigned to a treatment group,

11


since they will already be in established groups. The independent variable is, being motivated in

receiving safety training. The dependent variable is, not being motivated while receiving safety \

training.

The designs illustrated below in Table 1

Casual-Comparison Design Group Grouping Variable Dependent Variable

Case A (E) (X) 0Case B (C) 0Symbols: (E) = Experimental group/ motivated (C) = Control group/ unmotivated (X) = Grouping Variable 0 = Dependent Variable/ Health and and Attitude Survey, Job Scale Survey

Procedures

Participants will be asked to sign a consent form. Confirming the participant’s

willingness to participate within the study, a short packet, containing a demographic segment

followed by two surveys, will be administered. This packet will be presented in a paper-and –

pencil format. Participants will be supplied with necessary writing utensils. Completing the

demographic portion of the survey (See Figure 1 in Appendix), participants will select an option

determining whether or not the participant is motivated or unmotivated in their place of

establishment. Unknowingly placing themselves into a group, the participants will continue in

the completion of the packet.

Upon completing the packet, the participant will be debriefed about the nature of the

study, and thanked for their contribution towards the study. If participants are interested in

learning more about the results yielded from the study, participants will be given the researcher’s

work email.

Data Analysis Plan

12


Health and Safety Attitude survey, and the Perceived Job Stress Scale, in both groups

(motivated, not motivated) will be coded and analyzed in SPSS 15. Results from the two surveys

will be analyzed using an independent samples t test. If the calculated p value is less than .05,

the hypothesis will be supported. However, if the p value exceeds .05, the hypothesis will

be rejected.

Intending on generalizing this sample to a population, an independent t-test will be used

in analyzing data. Parametric in the sense that variables are normally distributed, contains an

interval scale of measurement, and selection of the participants is independent, the t-test will

determine if differences do exist between the two independent variables.

Supporting the hypothesis, the null hypothesis will more so than likely be rejected.

Using a two tailed test of significance, an alpha level of .05 will be set (p=.05); conveying

whether differences exist between motivated and unmotivated groups concerning job stress.

Time Schedule

Time schedule for project is presented in Table 2.

Aug 15-Sep 30,2012

Oct 15-Dec 14,2012

Dec 15-Jan 14,2012

Feb 152012

Proposal is completed and sent to IRB

XXXXX

Participants are surveyed XXXXX

Data is analyzed, begin working on results, discussion & limitation section.

XXXXX

Final report is due XXXXX

The preparation of the proposal should take four to five weeks. This process requires a

thorough search, for relevant literature, to comprise a literature review. Followed by, a project

proposal and a submission to the graduate schools Institutional Review Board. If the proposal is

13


approved by the panelists on the IRB, the study will commence, surveying participants within the

second week of October. The surveys will be administered as stated within the procedure

segment of the methods section. After collecting the required data (80 participants), a data

analysis will be run within the second week of December. By the second week of February, the

final report will be written, revising possible grammatical errors, computing a results section, and

inputting a discussion and limitations section.

14


References

Ali, F., Karamat , M., Noreen, H.,Khurram , M., Chuadary, A., Nadeen, M., Jamshaid, H., Farman, S. (2011). The effect of job stress and job performance on employee’s commitment. European Journal of Scientific Research. 60(2), 285-294.

Blair, E., Seo, D. (2007). Safety training: Making the connection to high performance. Professional Safety .52(10), 42-48.

Bureau of State Risk Management. <www.doa.state.wi.us.>

Kiam, F., Samavtyan, H., Poorabdiyan, S., Jafari, E. (2012). How safety training decreases perceived job stress: The effect of improvement in employees’ attitudes towards safety issues. Far East Journal of Psychology and Business. 6(1), 46-59.

Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kalman, H. K., Kemp, J. E. (2011). Designing Effective Instruction (6th Ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Pinkney, J. W. (1999). Job Stress Survey. In C. D. Spielberger & P. R. Vagg (Eds.), The fifteenth mental measurements yearbook. (pp. 499-501). Lincoln, NE: The University of Nebraska Press.

Wu, Y. (2011). Job stress and job performance among employees in the Taiwanese finance sector: The role of emotional intelligence. Social Behavior and Personality. 39(1), 21-32. DOI 10.2224/sbp.2011.39.1.21.

15


Appendix

Figure 1 - Demographics

DemographicsParticipant #________

Age:_______

Gender: Male________ Female________

Ethnicity (Circle best option): White/Caucasian African American Hispanic Asian Other: ________________

Marital Status: Single______ Married______ Divorced______ Widowed______

Do you have children that you support financially? Yes______ No______

If so, how many? ______

Do you live in a household that has a dual income? Yes______ No______

Highest level of education: High School diploma Some college Associates degree (Circle highest earned)Bachelor’s degree Master’s degree Doctorate degree

Specialized degree/certification

Current Occupation: ________________________

Are you currently employed? Yes______ No______

Starting your current job, were you motivated or unmotivated to start training? ______________

16


17

mday/jury 1/artifact 2 - epfr 501 chapters... · web viewcircumstance, multiple strategies can be...

Documents