Effects of Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, and Emotional Support on Quality of Life among Middle-aged Female Workers

Hae Ok Jeon; Yoorim Kweon

doi:10.7475/kjan.2015.27.5.537

Articles

Page Path

Original Article

Effects of Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, and Emotional Support on Quality of Life among Middle-aged Female Workers

Hae Ok Jeon¹, Yoorim Kweon²

Korean Journal of Adult Nursing 2015;27(5):537-547.
Published online: October 31, 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7475/kjan.2015.27.5.537

¹Department of Nursing, Cheongju University, Cheongju

²Department of Nursing, Ansan University, Ansan, Korea

Corresponding author: Kweon, Yoorim Department of Nursing, Ansan University, 155 Ansandaehak-ro, Sangrok-gu, Ansan 15328, Korea. Tel: +82-31-400-7130, Fax: +82-31-400-7107, E-mail: kyr1016@gmail.com

• Received: June 29, 2015 • Accepted: October 13, 2015

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

17 Views
0 Download
4 Crossref

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
REFERENCES

Abstract

Purpose
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of emotional labor, somatic symptoms, and emotional support on quality of life among middle-aged women workers.
Methods
The study design was a descriptive survey research. Data were collected from October 2013 to January 2014 in Korea. A self-reported questionnaire was administerd in a convenience sample of 264 middle aged women in various working places. The survey included socio-demographic and job-related factors, and the questionnaires about emotional labor, somatic symptoms, emotional support, and quality of life. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-test, ANOVA, pearson's correlation coefficient, and stepwise multiple regression.
Results
Stepwise multiple regression showed that somatic symptoms had the greatest effect on quality of life (β=-1.65, p<.001), followed by emotional support (β=0.67, p<.001), and job satisfaction (β=3.98, p<.001). And these variables accounted for 52% of quality of life among middle-aged women workers (F=97.14, p<.001).
Conclusion
These results suggest for clinical nurses to take somatic symptoms, emotional support, and job satisfaction into special account in order to improve the middle aged women worker's quality of life. Ultimately, a health promotion program focusing on these influential variables in workplace need to be developed for the given population.
Key Words: Health; Middle aged; Social-psychology; Social-support; Working-women

Table 1.

Socio-demographic and Job related Characteristics of the Subjects (N=264)

Characteristics	Categories	n (%) or M±SD
Age (year)		48.89±4.32
	40~45	55 (20.8)
	46~50	132 (50.0)
	51~55	55 (20.8)
	56~61	22 (8.4)
Education	≤Middle school	9 (3.4)
	High school	143 (54.2)
	≥University	112 (42.4)
Religion	Yes	179 (67.8)
Religion	No	85 (32.2)
Marital status	Married	235 (89.0)
Marital status	Single (or divorce, bereavement)	29 (11.0)
Personal monthly income (10,000 won)	＜100	18 (6.8)
	100~＜200	151 (57.2)
	≥200	95 (36.0)
Classification of occupation	Regular workers	163 (61.7)
Classification of occupation	Contingent workers	101 (38.3)
Type of job	Self-employed, C & I	55 (20.8)
	Office job	29 (11.0)
	Specialized job	70 (26.5)
	Sales and service	65 (24.6)
	Production worker	15 (5.7)
	Etc. (including directorship)	30 (11.4)
Reasons for working	For making money	184 (69.7)
	For self-realization	29 (11.0)
	For do a role as social member	27 (10.2)
	Etc.	24 (9.1)
Job Satisfaction	Not satisfied	15 (5.7)
	So-so	70 (26.5)
	Satisfied	166 (62.9)
	Very satisfied	13 (4.9)
Diagnosed diseases (multiple choices)	Hypertension	34 (12.8)
	Diabetes	9 (3.4)
	Gastrointestinal disease	27 (10.2)
	Cardiovascular disease	9 (3.4)
	Osteoporosis	6 (2.2)
	Arthritis	20 (7.5)
Number of diagnosed disease		0.66±0.81

C & I=commerce and industry.

Table 2.

Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, Emotional Support and Quality of life of the Subjects (N=264)

Variables	n (%)	M±SD	Possible range	Obtained range
Emotional labor		73.46±19.25	17~136	23~127
Somatic symptoms		6.68±4.64	0~30	0~25
High somatic symptoms (15~30)	18 (6.8)
Median somatic symptoms (10~14)	48 (18.2)
Low somatic symptoms (5~9)	102 (38.6)
Minimal somatic symptoms (0~4)	96 (36.4)
Emotional support		48.71±8.62	13~65	23~65
Quality of life		75.25±15.93	0~108	28~108
Physical aspect		21.35±5.43	0~28	2~28
Social/family aspect		17.44±5.65	0~28	1~28
Emotional aspect		17.52±4.39	0~24	0~24
Functional aspect		18.94±5.62	0~28	0~28

Table 3.

Differences of Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, Emotional Support and Quality of life by General Characteristics and Job related Characteristics of the Subjects (N=264)

	Emotional labor		Somatic symptoms		Emotional support		Quality of life
Characteristics	M±SD	t/F/r (p)	M±SD	t/F/r (p)	M±SD	t/F/r (p)	M±SD	t/F/r (p)
Age (year)^†
40~45	72.89±16.56	2.83	7.09±5.03	0.31	48.85±8.36	0.94	77.13±15.82	0.36
46~50	72.06±18.81	(.039)	6.72±4.54	(.817)	48.86±8.53	(.963)	74.64±15.35	(.781)
51~55	79.65±20.20		6.40±4.66		48.55±9.11		75.33±16.13
≥56	67.81±23.11		6.14±4.66		47.86±9.04		74.00±19.62
Education
≤Middle school	73.67±20.14	0.31	6.56±4.45	0.40	48.11±10.24	0.02	73.11±11.35	0.20
High school	74.30±19.50	(.732)	6.92±4.36	(.670)	48.74±8.13	(.987)	74.90±15.24	(.818)
≥University	72.38±19.00		6.39±5.01		48.71±9.16		75.88±17.15
Religion
Yes	72.61±19.68	-1.05	7.10±4.92	2.11	49.21±8.38	1.37	75.06±16.02	-0.28
No	75.26±18.32	(.297)	5.81±3.87	(.036)	47.66±9.06	(.173)	75.65±15.84	(.781)
Marital status
Married	74.06±19.55	1.45	6.54±4.61	-1.46	48.70±8.68	-0.06	75.96±15.75	2.08
Single (or divorce, bereavement)	68.59±16.13	(.149)	7.86±4.83	(.147)	48.79±8.23	(.955)	69.48±16.52	(.039)
Personal monthly income
＜100	76.61±20.66	0.65	6.28±4.51	1.18	50.17±8.43	1.53	79.06±14.66	2.42
100~＜200	74.09±19.12	(.524)	7.06±4.60	(.310)	47.91±8.56	(.219)	73.42±16.29	(.091)
≥200	71.86±19.27		6.16±4.72		49.69±8.70		77.43±15.33
Classification of occupation
Regular workers	72.23±19.86	-1.33	6.44±4.58	-1.07	49.32±9.15	1.47	75.69±16.42	0.57
Contingent workers	75.46±18.15	(.186)	7.07±4.74	(.286)	47.72±7.63	(.144)	74.54±15.18	(.572)
Type of job
Self-employed, C & I	73.96±19.28	0.84	6.82±4.91	2.20	49.07±8.66	0.76	72.67±12.94	1.32
Office job	74.83±16.27	(.843)	8.03±5.53	(.055)	47.21±10.52	(.580)	72.24±17.92	(.258)
Specialized job	71.11±18.78		5.47±4.11		48.14±8.52		77.16±16.85
Sales and service	73.29±20.94		7.25±4.74		50.15±8.09		78.08±16.46
Production worker	77.33±17.34		8.27±4.03		49.20±7.69		71.33±18.02
Etc. (including directorship)	75.13±20.90		5.93±3.92		47.43±8.50		74.27±13.92
Reasons for working^†
For making money^a	73.08±19.29	0.33	7.13±4.70	3.27	48.64±8.54	0.43	73.46±16.07	3.60
For self-realization^b	72.86±21.85	(.805)	4.79±4.05	(.022)	48.41±8.43	(.730)	82.66±14.90	(.014)
For do a role as social member^c ^d	73.44±20.17		7.07±4.42		47.93±7.67		75.56±14.34	a＜b
Etc.^d	77.17±14.91		5.08±4.42		50.50±10.60		79.71±15.20
Job satisfaction^†
Not satisfied^a	70.20±13.71	1.54	9.80±5.70	5.82	41.80±9.68	3.62	58.73±19.29	10.63
So-so^b	75.96±18.42	(.204)	7.91±4.31	(.001)	49.56±7.44	(.014)	70.79±13.18 (	(＜.001)
Satisfied^c	73.43±19.80		5.89±4.29	a, b＞c	49.01±8.57	a＜b, c	78.22±15.12	a＜c, d
Very satisfied^d	64.23±20.58		6.54±6.65		48.31±11.24		80.38±19.57
Number of diagnosed disease		.08		.31		-.07		-.27
		(.221)		(＜.001)		(.240)		(＜.001)

C & I=commerce and industry;

^†Scheffé test.

Table 4.

Correlations among Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, Emotional Support, and Quality of life (N=264)

Variables	Emotional labor	Somatic symptoms	Emotional support
Variables	r (p)	r (p)	r (p)
Emotional labor	1
Somatic symptoms	-.10 (.094)	1
Emotional support	.06 (.315)	-.25 (＜.001)	1
Quality of life	.08 (.191)	-.61 (＜.001)	.50 (＜.001)

Table 5.

The Influencing Factor on Quality of life of the Subjects (N=264

Variables	Standardized _β	SE	t (p)	R² change	R²
(Constant)		5.74	6.84
Somatic symptoms	-1.65	0.15	-10.69 (＜.001)	.37	.37
Emotional support	0.67	0.08	8.17 (＜.001)	.13	.50
Job satisfaction	3.98	1.02	3.90 (＜.001)	.03	.53

²Adjusted R=.52, F=97.14, p＜.001

REFERENCES

1.Statistics Korea. Annual report on the economically active population survey [Internet]. Daejeon: Statistics Korea; 2013. [cited 2014 August 7]. Available from:.http://kostat.go.kr/portal/korea/kor_pi/6/4/index.action?bmode=read&seq=462.
2.Ministry of Employment and Labor. Employment trends [Internet]. Sejong: Ministry of Employment and Labor; 2014. [cited 2014 November 1]. Available from:.http://www.moel.go.kr/.
3.Min HJ. Who gets a good job?-An analysis on the entry process into good jobs and bad jobs in the Korean women's labor market. Economy and Society. 2008;78:223-55.
4.Korea Employment Information Service. Employment issue [Internet]. Chungcheongbuk-do: Korea Employment Information Service; 2014. [cited 2014 November 1]. Available from:.http://www.keis.or.kr/.
5.Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2013 Better Life Index [Internet]. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; 2014. [cited 2014 November 1]. Available from:.http://www.oecd.org/statistics/2014.
6.Chung MS. Resilience, coping methods and quality of life in middle-aged women. Journal of Korean Academy of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing. 2011;20(4):345-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.12934/jkpmhn.2011.20.4.345.
Article
7.Lee JS, Choi WS. A study on path of work-family reconciliation conflict of married working women. Journal of Asian Women. 2011;50(1):169-98.
8.Räikkönen K, Matthews KA, Kuller LH. Depressive symptoms and stressful life events predict metabolic syndrome among middle-aged women: a comparison of world health organization, adult treatment panel III, and international diabetes foundation definitions. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(4):872-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc06-1857.
9.Blom V. Contingent self-esteem, stressors and burnout in working women and men. Work. 2012;43(2):123-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/WOR-2012-1366.
Article
10.Jeong MG. A study on the effect of emotional labor and psychological well-being on employee's emotional dissonance. Korea Journal of Business Administration. 2012;25(1):171-93.
11.Guy ME, Newman MA. Women's jobs, men's jobs: Sex segregation and emotional labor. Public Administration Review. 2004;64(3):289-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00373.x.
Article
12.Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-15: validity of a new measure for evaluating the severity of somatic symptoms. Psychosomatic Medicine. 2002;64(2):258-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00006842-200203000-00008.
13.Chandola T, Britton A, Brunner E, Hemingway H, Malik M, Kumari M, et al. Work stress and coronary heart disease: what are the mechanisms? European Heart Journal. 2008;29(5):640-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehm584.
Article
14.Norberg M, Stenlund H, Lindahl B, Andersson C, Eriksson JW, Weinehall L. Work stress and low emotional support is associated with increased risk of future type 2 diabetes in women. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice. 2007;76(3):368-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2006.09.002.
Article
15.Mann S, Cowburn J. Emotional labour and stress within mental health nursing. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing. 2005;12(2):154-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2850.2004.00807.x.
Article
16.Yang X, Ge C, Hu B, Chi T, Wang L. Relationship between quality of life and occupational stress among teachers. Public Health. 2009;123(11):750-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2009.09.018.
17.Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*POWER 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods. 2007;39:175-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146.
Article
PDF
18.Mann S. Achieving frontline communication excellence: the potential cost to health. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 1998;41(4):254-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/47.735367.
Article
19.Weber KD, Patterson BR. Construction and validation of a communication based emotional support scale. Communication Research Reports. 1996;13(1):68-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08824099609362072.
Article
20.Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, Sarafian B, Linn E, Bonomi A, et al. The functional assessment of cancer therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1993;11(3):570-9.
21.Webster K, Cella D, Yost K. The functional assessment of chronic illness therapy (FACIT) measurement system: properties, applications, and interpretation. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2003;1(1):1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-1-79.
22.Lee BH, Park AC, Lee KH. The structural relationships on the family income, self-esteem, role adaptations, and identity formation of the married mid-life women; focusing on employed women. Korean Journal of Educational Psychology. 2010;24(1):103-20.
23.Kang SO, Ha KS. Relations between the middle aged's perception of successful aging and their preparations for the old age. Journal of Digital Convergence. 2013;11(12):121-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.14400/JDPM.2013.11.12.121.
Article
24.Ryu TM, We HK, Jung HW. An empirical study on the effect of emotional labor on job satisfaction: the moderating effects of emotional leadership and empowerment. Journal of Human Resource Management Research. 2014;21(3):435-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.14396/jhrmr.2014.21.3.435.
25.Shin KR, Kang Y, Park HJ, Kim K, Jin LH. Depression, soma-toform disorders, and quality of life between poor sleepers and good sleepers in community-dwelling older adults. The Journal of Korean Academic Society of Adult Nursing. 2011;23(4):332-9.
26.Kim HJ, Choi H. Emergency nurses' professional quality of life: compassion satisfaction, burnout, and secondary traumatic stress. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2012;18(3):320-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2012.18.3.320.
Article
27.Kim SA, Kim SY. The impacts of self-esteem and social support on mental health of the middle-age women. Journal of Welfare for the Aged. 2011;52:109-30.
28.Baik DW, Yom YH. Effects of social support and emotional intelligence in the relationship between emotional labor and burnout among clinical nurses. The Journal of Korean Nursing Administration Academic Society. 2012;18(3):271-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2012.18.3.271.
29.Cho EA, Ojh HE. Effects of laughter therapy on depression, quality of life, resilience and immune responses in breast cancer survivors. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 2011;41(3):285-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2011.41.3.285.
Article
30.Kim AK. Yangsaeng and health related quality of life (HRQOL). Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing. 2010;16(3):297-306. http://dx.doi.org/10.4069/kjwhn.2010.16.3.297.

Figure & Data

References

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Determinants of Quality of Life (QoL) in Female Caregivers in Elderly Care Facilities in Korea
Hee-Kyung Kim, Hye-Suk Oh
Behavioral Sciences.2024; 14(1): 53. CrossRef
The Effects of Emotional Labor and Workplace Violence on the Somatic Symptoms of Customer Service Employees in Department Stores
Bongsoon Ryu, Bo Hyun Park
Research in Community and Public Health Nursing.2023; 34: 61. CrossRef
Somatic Symptoms and Quality of Life in Adults: Moderating Effect of Spiritual Well-being
Youngrye Park, Hee Moon
The Korean Journal of Rehabilitation Nursing.2018; 21(2): 132. CrossRef
Experiences in Self-leading Leisure Activities of Middle-aged Office Workers
Jeong-Soo KIM
Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education.2016; 28(5): 1348. CrossRef

Cite

CITE

export

Copy Download

Format
XML Download

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

Effects of Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, and Emotional Support on Quality of Life among Middle-aged Female Workers

Korean J Adult Nurs. 2015;27(5):537-547. Published online October 31, 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7475/kjan.2015.27.5.537

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

Effects of Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, and Emotional Support on Quality of Life among Middle-aged Female Workers

Korean J Adult Nurs. 2015;27(5):537-547. Published online October 31, 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7475/kjan.2015.27.5.537

Effects of Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, and Emotional Support on Quality of Life among Middle-aged Female Workers

Table 1.

Socio-demographic and Job related Characteristics of the Subjects (N=264)

Characteristics	Categories	n (%) or M±SD
Age (year)		48.89±4.32
	40~45	55 (20.8)
	46~50	132 (50.0)
	51~55	55 (20.8)
	56~61	22 (8.4)
Education	≤Middle school	9 (3.4)
	High school	143 (54.2)
	≥University	112 (42.4)
Religion	Yes	179 (67.8)
Religion	No	85 (32.2)
Marital status	Married	235 (89.0)
Marital status	Single (or divorce, bereavement)	29 (11.0)
Personal monthly income (10,000 won)	＜100	18 (6.8)
	100~＜200	151 (57.2)
	≥200	95 (36.0)
Classification of occupation	Regular workers	163 (61.7)
Classification of occupation	Contingent workers	101 (38.3)
Type of job	Self-employed, C & I	55 (20.8)
	Office job	29 (11.0)
	Specialized job	70 (26.5)
	Sales and service	65 (24.6)
	Production worker	15 (5.7)
	Etc. (including directorship)	30 (11.4)
Reasons for working	For making money	184 (69.7)
	For self-realization	29 (11.0)
	For do a role as social member	27 (10.2)
	Etc.	24 (9.1)
Job Satisfaction	Not satisfied	15 (5.7)
	So-so	70 (26.5)
	Satisfied	166 (62.9)
	Very satisfied	13 (4.9)
Diagnosed diseases (multiple choices)	Hypertension	34 (12.8)
	Diabetes	9 (3.4)
	Gastrointestinal disease	27 (10.2)
	Cardiovascular disease	9 (3.4)
	Osteoporosis	6 (2.2)
	Arthritis	20 (7.5)
Number of diagnosed disease		0.66±0.81

C & I=commerce and industry.

Table 2.

Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, Emotional Support and Quality of life of the Subjects (N=264)

Variables	n (%)	M±SD	Possible range	Obtained range
Emotional labor		73.46±19.25	17~136	23~127
Somatic symptoms		6.68±4.64	0~30	0~25
High somatic symptoms (15~30)	18 (6.8)
Median somatic symptoms (10~14)	48 (18.2)
Low somatic symptoms (5~9)	102 (38.6)
Minimal somatic symptoms (0~4)	96 (36.4)
Emotional support		48.71±8.62	13~65	23~65
Quality of life		75.25±15.93	0~108	28~108
Physical aspect		21.35±5.43	0~28	2~28
Social/family aspect		17.44±5.65	0~28	1~28
Emotional aspect		17.52±4.39	0~24	0~24
Functional aspect		18.94±5.62	0~28	0~28

Table 3.

Differences of Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, Emotional Support and Quality of life by General Characteristics and Job related Characteristics of the Subjects (N=264)

	Emotional labor		Somatic symptoms		Emotional support		Quality of life
Characteristics	M±SD	t/F/r (p)	M±SD	t/F/r (p)	M±SD	t/F/r (p)	M±SD	t/F/r (p)
Age (year)^†
40~45	72.89±16.56	2.83	7.09±5.03	0.31	48.85±8.36	0.94	77.13±15.82	0.36
46~50	72.06±18.81	(.039)	6.72±4.54	(.817)	48.86±8.53	(.963)	74.64±15.35	(.781)
51~55	79.65±20.20		6.40±4.66		48.55±9.11		75.33±16.13
≥56	67.81±23.11		6.14±4.66		47.86±9.04		74.00±19.62
Education
≤Middle school	73.67±20.14	0.31	6.56±4.45	0.40	48.11±10.24	0.02	73.11±11.35	0.20
High school	74.30±19.50	(.732)	6.92±4.36	(.670)	48.74±8.13	(.987)	74.90±15.24	(.818)
≥University	72.38±19.00		6.39±5.01		48.71±9.16		75.88±17.15
Religion
Yes	72.61±19.68	-1.05	7.10±4.92	2.11	49.21±8.38	1.37	75.06±16.02	-0.28
No	75.26±18.32	(.297)	5.81±3.87	(.036)	47.66±9.06	(.173)	75.65±15.84	(.781)
Marital status
Married	74.06±19.55	1.45	6.54±4.61	-1.46	48.70±8.68	-0.06	75.96±15.75	2.08
Single (or divorce, bereavement)	68.59±16.13	(.149)	7.86±4.83	(.147)	48.79±8.23	(.955)	69.48±16.52	(.039)
Personal monthly income
＜100	76.61±20.66	0.65	6.28±4.51	1.18	50.17±8.43	1.53	79.06±14.66	2.42
100~＜200	74.09±19.12	(.524)	7.06±4.60	(.310)	47.91±8.56	(.219)	73.42±16.29	(.091)
≥200	71.86±19.27		6.16±4.72		49.69±8.70		77.43±15.33
Classification of occupation
Regular workers	72.23±19.86	-1.33	6.44±4.58	-1.07	49.32±9.15	1.47	75.69±16.42	0.57
Contingent workers	75.46±18.15	(.186)	7.07±4.74	(.286)	47.72±7.63	(.144)	74.54±15.18	(.572)
Type of job
Self-employed, C & I	73.96±19.28	0.84	6.82±4.91	2.20	49.07±8.66	0.76	72.67±12.94	1.32
Office job	74.83±16.27	(.843)	8.03±5.53	(.055)	47.21±10.52	(.580)	72.24±17.92	(.258)
Specialized job	71.11±18.78		5.47±4.11		48.14±8.52		77.16±16.85
Sales and service	73.29±20.94		7.25±4.74		50.15±8.09		78.08±16.46
Production worker	77.33±17.34		8.27±4.03		49.20±7.69		71.33±18.02
Etc. (including directorship)	75.13±20.90		5.93±3.92		47.43±8.50		74.27±13.92
Reasons for working^†
For making money^a	73.08±19.29	0.33	7.13±4.70	3.27	48.64±8.54	0.43	73.46±16.07	3.60
For self-realization^b	72.86±21.85	(.805)	4.79±4.05	(.022)	48.41±8.43	(.730)	82.66±14.90	(.014)
For do a role as social member^c ^d	73.44±20.17		7.07±4.42		47.93±7.67		75.56±14.34	a＜b
Etc.^d	77.17±14.91		5.08±4.42		50.50±10.60		79.71±15.20
Job satisfaction^†
Not satisfied^a	70.20±13.71	1.54	9.80±5.70	5.82	41.80±9.68	3.62	58.73±19.29	10.63
So-so^b	75.96±18.42	(.204)	7.91±4.31	(.001)	49.56±7.44	(.014)	70.79±13.18 (	(＜.001)
Satisfied^c	73.43±19.80		5.89±4.29	a, b＞c	49.01±8.57	a＜b, c	78.22±15.12	a＜c, d
Very satisfied^d	64.23±20.58		6.54±6.65		48.31±11.24		80.38±19.57
Number of diagnosed disease		.08		.31		-.07		-.27
		(.221)		(＜.001)		(.240)		(＜.001)

C & I=commerce and industry;

^†Scheffé test.

Table 4.

Correlations among Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, Emotional Support, and Quality of life (N=264)

Variables	Emotional labor	Somatic symptoms	Emotional support
Variables	r (p)	r (p)	r (p)
Emotional labor	1
Somatic symptoms	-.10 (.094)	1
Emotional support	.06 (.315)	-.25 (＜.001)	1
Quality of life	.08 (.191)	-.61 (＜.001)	.50 (＜.001)

Table 5.

The Influencing Factor on Quality of life of the Subjects (N=264

Variables	Standardized _β	SE	t (p)	R² change	R²
(Constant)		5.74	6.84
Somatic symptoms	-1.65	0.15	-10.69 (＜.001)	.37	.37
Emotional support	0.67	0.08	8.17 (＜.001)	.13	.50
Job satisfaction	3.98	1.02	3.90 (＜.001)	.03	.53

²Adjusted R=.52, F=97.14, p＜.001

Table 1. Socio-demographic and Job related Characteristics of the Subjects (N=264)

C & I=commerce and industry.

Table 2. Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, Emotional Support and Quality of life of the Subjects (N=264)

Table 3. Differences of Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, Emotional Support and Quality of life by General Characteristics and Job related Characteristics of the Subjects (N=264)

C & I=commerce and industry;

†

Scheffé test.

Table 4. Correlations among Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, Emotional Support, and Quality of life (N=264)

Articles

Page Path

Effects of Emotional Labor, Somatic Symptoms, and Emotional Support on Quality of Life among Middle-aged Female Workers

Full Article

Abstract

REFERENCES

Figure & Data

References

Citations

CITE

Download Citation

Format:

Include:

Table 1.

Table 2.

Table 3.

Table 4.

Table 5.

ABOUT

BROWSE ARTICLES

EDITORIAL POLICY

FOR CONTRIBUTORS