TEACHER BURNOUT: ATTRIBUTIONAL ASPECTS

Transcription

1 Copyright 2006 by the Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos. Spain Psychology in Spain, 2006, Vol. 10. No 1, The syndrome of burnout at work refers to a combination of emotions, physical symptoms and behaviours that develop as a consequence of the conditions and characteristics of the so-called helping professions (Ben-Zur & Yagil, 2005; Buunk & Schaufeli, 1999; Gil- Monte & Peiró, 1997; Maslach, Leiter & Schaufeli, 2001). TEACHER BURNOUT: ATTRIBUTIONAL ASPECTS Mª. Antonia Manassero*, Esther García Buades*, Gema Torrens*, Carmen Ramis*, Ángel Vázquez** and Victoria A. Ferrer* *Department of Psychology, University of the Balearic Islands. **Department of Applied Pedagogy and Psychology of Education, University of the Balearic Islands The theory of attribution establishes that the attributive dimensions of the perceived causes of a situation or event determine people s type of behaviour in relation to it. The perceived causes of burnout can modulate coping behaviour towards it. This paper analyzes the relationships between the dimensions of burnout and causal attribution in a sample of 614 teachers from nursery to secondary level at schools in the Balearic Islands. The Scale of Causal Attribution Dimensions was applied. This scale assesses Locus of Causality, Stability, Controllability, Globality and Intentionality of the perceived cause of stress. Burnout was measured with our own version of the MBI for teachers (Maslach & Jackson, 1986). The results obtained indicate that the dimensions of burnout present a moderate relationship with the causal dimensions, so that greater Emotional Exhaustion corresponds to perceptions of more causes that are more global and intentional, and less controllable; greater Depersonalization was found to correspond to perceptions of more internal, stable, intentional and global causes; and finally, greater Personal Accomplishment corresponded to perceptions of causes that were less stable (unstable), less global (specific) and more controllable. The consequences and intervention strategies that the theoretical framework of attribution can contribute are analyzed. Key words: Burnout, causal attribution, causal dimensions, teachers. La teoría de la atribución establece que las dimensiones atributivas de las causas percibidas de un hecho determinan el tipo de conducta de las personas sobre el mismo. Las causas percibidas del burnout pueden modular la conducta de afrontamiento del mismo. Se analizan las relaciones entre las dimensiones del burnout y la atribución causal en una muestra de 614 profesores de preescolar a secundaria/bachillerato de las Islas Baleares. Se aplicó la Escala de Dimensiones Causales Atributivas, que evalúa Lugar de Causalidad, Estabilidad, Controlabilidad, Globalidad e Intencionalidad de la causa percibida del estrés. El burnout se midió con una versión propia del MBI para profesores (Maslach y Jackson, 1986). Los resultados obtenidos indican que las dimensiones de burnout presentan una relación moderada con las dimensiones causales, de modo que a mayor Agotamiento Emocional se corresponde con percepciones de causas más estables, globales, intencionales y menos controlables; a mayor Despersonalización nos encontramos con percepciones de causas más internas, estables, intencionales y globales; mientras que mayor Realización Personal se corresponde con percepciones de causas menos estables (inestables), menos globales (específicas) y más controlables. Se analizan las consecuencias y las estrategias de intervención que puede aportar el marco teórico de la atribución. Palabras clave: Burnout, Atribución causal, Dimensiones atributivas, Profesores. The original Spanish version of this paper has been previously published in Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 2005, Vol. 21, No 1 and 2, Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Mª Antonia Manassero, Departamento de Psicología., Universidad de las Islas Baleares, Spain. ma.manassero@uib.es The original idea of the present study was to study burnout in teaching, as an example of the helping professions where this phenomenon frequently occurs. However, its profound relationship with the more generalized concept of occupational stress highlighted the need to examine the incidence and characteristics of stress and burnout in the teaching profession in a combined way. Stress and burnout in the context of teaching (though by no means limited to this profession) are pathological syndromes suffered by teachers and caused largely by the conditions (organizational and of many other types) 66

2 in which teaching takes place. A summary analysis of the current situation in education permits the identification of some of the social and organizational factors that constitute sources of stress and burnout: the combination of changes in society and the educational system itself has led to a growing complexity of the teacher s role and has increased the demands of the school environment. Paradoxically, these growing demands are accompanied by a devaluation of, and a reduction in support for, the school system, which in turn lead to severe occupational dissatisfaction and health problems among teaching staff. In general terms, burnout in the helping professions, and therefore also in teaching, results from the imbalance between the demands of the profession (helping people) and the rewards received (in the case of teaching, perceived selfefficacy in the achievement of this objective, observing progress in students, receiving recognition from others, and so on). These professions share a set of basic characteristics (Pines and Aronson, 1988): they are emotionally draining, they focus on the client, and the people who choose to work in them have certain personality characteristics in common. But apart from these features shared with the helping professions, teaching involves some aggravating factors which contribute to exacerbating burnout problems among teachers: there is constant personal contact and interaction with students; they need to be an expert, to display patience and sensitivity and to be useful; their work is constantly open to scrutiny and evaluation by a variety of people; they work with people who may not wish to work with them or to benefit from their efforts; salaries tend to be lower than those in comparable jobs; and teachers expectations of different aspects of their work, such as its perceived value, student motivation, etc., often exceed reality. Burnout can in some cases be one of the consequences of suffering stress, while in others it is possible to suffer burnout without first undergoing stress. In the former case, it seems obvious that the stressors themselves would be the cause of burnout, whereas in the latter, burnout can be triggered by factors unrelated to stress. In any case, since both burnout and stress arise from work conditions, their causes would be expected to display a high degree of overlap. Whether the result is stress or burnout, its degree of intensity and other characteristics will depend upon and be modulated by further factors, such as subjective perceptions, environmental circumstances, and so on. Research on burnout and stress has confirmed the role of perceived control and coping as moderators of the consequences of stress. Attribution theory and research may be applied to the study of stress and burnout. When faced with negative situations, people devote cognitive activity to seeking the causes of events, which presumably affect subsequent activities. In fact, causal attributions constitute one of the most universal forms of analyzing reality, since they fulfil basic functions in motivation for action. People seek and make causal attributions in a wide variety of motivational areas, especially in situations of unexpected failure, where causal thinking is most likely to be applied (Weiner, 1986). Furthermore, the theoretical framework of attribution contains its own body of knowledge and propositions about the relationships between the antecedents of an outcome and its affective and behavioural consequences. Therefore, the theoretical framework of causal attribution deals with the causes of events and situations, providing a general taxonomy of possible individual causes through so-called causal dimensions (Försterling, 2001; Hewstone, 1983, 1989; Kent & Martinko, 1995; Weiner, 1986). These dimensions allow for a deeper analysis of the potential consequences for future behaviour and also for the individual, according to the quality of the perceived causal attribution in relation to the causes of stress (Manassero, Vázquez, Ferrer, Fornés & Fernández, 1995, 2003). The causal dimensions applied were Locus of Causality, Stability, Controllability (Weiner, 1986), Intentionality and Globality (Abramson, Seligman & Teasdale, 1978). The Locus of Causality dimension classifies causes into internal and external categories and affects cognitions and feelings associated with the self, such as self-esteem, self-concept, self-efficacy or pride. The Stability dimension classifies causes into stable (constant over time) and unstable (variable over time), and is linked to expectations, and more specifically to the possibility of change in expectations of future outcomes (Hewstone, 1989; Manassero & Vázquez, 1994; Weiner, 1986). The Controllability dimension classifies causes into controllable (subject to volition) and uncontrollable (not subject to volition), and refers to others feelings and judgements. Globality distinguishes between global attributions (independent of context and circumstances) and specific attributions (peculiar to each situation) and has been studied in relation to cases of helplessness, hopelessness and depression (Abramson, Seligman & Teasdale, 1978), on finding that the appearance of these pathologies 67

3 involved a perception of causes as global, that is, inevitably present in any situation. Finally, the Intentionality dimension classifies causes into intentional (conscious) and unintentional (nonconscious). These last two dimensions, globality and intentionality are different in nature from the first three, since they are not so much static properties of causes, but rather features linked to the perception of the attributor (Manassero & Vázquez, 1995). As stated previously, the importance of these causal dimensions is not limited to their taxonomic capacity, but extends to their importance in relation to behavioural decisions and affective consequences. This is linked to motivation, since the causal dimensions act as mediators between individuals cognitions and behaviour, favouring certain types of behaviour and inhibiting the possibility of others, which is what characterizes motivation. In this study, the five-dimensional taxonomy used is based on Weiner s (1986) three-dimensional model, which links attribution and motivation, and is clearly a more complete model. Our classification is characterized by, among other aspects, its distinction between the causal locus (internal-external), as measured by the locus of causality dimension, and causal control, measured by the controllability dimension. In this way it overcomes the problems posed from the point of view of attribution theory by Rotter s locus of control (Weiner, 1986). The causal study of academic achievement led us to develop a five-dimensional scale (Manassero & Vázquez, 1997) for measuring the causal dimensions that permits a classification of the attributional properties of individual causes independently of the situation in which they were generated. This analysis, forming part of a wider study on stress and burnout in education (Manassero et al., 2003), examines the causes of burnout and stress in the teaching profession from an attributional perspective, which allows us to dimensionalize them. This perspective affords the possibility of modifying the individual s perceptions of the causes with a view to making them more adaptive and appropriate. METHOD Sample The final study sample was made up of 614 school (nursery to secondary) teachers from the Balearic Islands, in Spain (α= 95.5%; error= ±4%). The selection of schools (54 in total) in which the study was carried out was made using stratified random sampling, with the 68 following criteria: location (urban, suburban, rural), funding (state-funded, state-subsidized, private) size and level (nursery, primary or secondary). The sample has a majority of women (63%), and the commonest age profile is 31 to 40 years (47%). With regard to type of school, the majority work in statefunded schools (69.5%) of medium size (55.7%) and spread almost equally across rural (35.6%), urban (35.1%) and suburban (29.3%) locations. In terms of professional status, the majority are secondary school teachers (45.2%), who have not held positions of responsibility in their schools (58.9%), who over the previous year have taught classes with under 30 pupils (52.3%), with 11 years or less of service (48.6%), and who are teaching languages (31.4%) or natural sciences (30.8%) (in the case of secondary school teachers). In the final sample 37 teachers were on sick leave for various reasons. The specific consideration of this group is important, given the potential influence of stress on the origin of their situation. Instruments Two assessment instruments were used: a questionnaire including a range of scales, and a standardized personality instrument (16PF, TEA version). The scales included in the questionnaire were covered the socio-demographic and professional data that emerge as relevant from a review of the literature: sex, age, marital status, number of children, normal place of residence, workplace, qualifications, and professional record covering the teacher s entire career. This record included current situation, type and level of school, numbers of hours taught per day, professional status, courses/subjects taught, type and duration of academic posts held, number of pupils per class, any lengthy periods of sick leave taken, and whether they also work at a different school. - A scale for self-assessment of the stress level normally experienced, with five points (none, a little, normal, high, extreme) is included. - A scale covering possible links between causes of stress and stressors. Based on the information provided in the literature on teacher stress and the data obtained in studies carried out in other professions (Fornés, 1992), a list of 32 possible causes of professional stress among teachers was drawn up, each to be assessed by participants on a 9- point scale (1 none, 9 extreme) as to its importance. Since the list is not exhaustive, it was left open so that other causes could be added. A variable, Total

4 Intensity of Causes, was defined as the sum of the scores for each of the 32 individual causes. This variable is a measurement of the stress-generating capacity of teaching for each teacher. - The Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI, Maslach & Jackson, 1986). The version of the MBI applied here is a direct translation carried out by the authors of the present study. It consists of 22 items, as in the original, but the items are rated on 9-point semantic differential scales referring to frequencies (1 never, to 9 always). - The dimensional features of causal attribution were measured using the Scale of Causal Attribution Dimensions (EDCA, Manassero & Vázquez, 1997) which evaluates the following dimensions: Locus of Causality, Stability, Controllability, Globality and Intentionality. Prior to EDCA application, the main cause of stress in the respondent s personal experience is elicited. The respondent then scores 15 features of the cause through 15 items. For all items, semantic differentials on a 9-point numerical scale (1 to 9) are used, with randomly balanced rising and falling scales. Procedure The instruments described above were integrated into a general and broader questionnaire designed ad hoc for the global study, which also contained an explanation of the goals of the study, a statement guaranteeing confidentiality for responses and detailed instructions for correct completion of the different instruments. The head teacher of each school received one questionnaire per teacher at the school, each in a separate envelope, with further statements regarding the voluntary nature of the study and the anonymity of those participating, and detailed instructions about the control of questionnaire distribution and their return to the research team. Of the 1,500 questionnaires sent out, 614 were returned correctly filled in, and it was these that made up the final sample. RESULTS An initial consideration of the scores for stressors in education allowed identification of those felt on average to be of the highest intensity: insufficient time to prepare lessons, excessive number of pupils per class, low status of the teaching profession, lack of interest taken by parents in their children s schooling, lack of motivation among pupils, excessive paperwork, and the hostility and bad behaviour of pupils in the classroom. Causes of stress with the lowest intensity ratings are: feelings of professional inadequacy, the monotony of teaching, teaching as a profession, and causes of stress external to teaching. Table 1. shows the frequency of stressors according to the teachers assessment. From a correlational perspective, the relationships between the scores on causes of stress and the continuous socio-demographic and professional variables were analyzed on two levels: the Pearson correlations between each pair of variables, and the multiple correlation analysis that permits selection of the variables with the highest predictive power. Given the large number of variables involved, in the case of the Pearson correlations only the significant (p<.05) and relevant ones for each independent variable will be discussed. Teachers age correlated with the Total Intensity of Causes variable and with the majority of the individual Table 1 Distribution of the most important causes of stress, according to teachers MOST IMPORTANT CAUSES % Isolation 1.2 Discipline 6.0 Excessive demands 3.2 Complaints/disapproval.2 Lack of time 15.4 Conflicts with other teachers 4.4 Lack of support from colleagues.8 Excessive student-teacher ratio 10.8 Low status of the profession 4.2 Lack of good atmosphere 2.2 Lack of parental interest 2.0 Problems organizing mysef l.8 Low pupil motivation 10.8 Rapid pace of work 1.0 Paperwork 3.6 Bad pupil behaviour 4.6 Completing the programmes 1.4 Deficient equipment 1.4 Conflicts with pupils 1.2 Low salary 1.2 Strict task deadlines.8 Low expectations 1.6 Dissatisfaction 2.4 Rapid change 1.0 Sense of inadequacy.8 Different subjects 3.6 Excessive contact hours 2.2 Pressure from parents 1.0 Supplementary tasks.4 Monotony of the job.6 Teaching as a profession.4 External to teaching 3.0 Others* 5.8 * Corresponds to the nine causes added by teachers to those included in the questionnaire 69

5 stressors, which indicates that the higher their age, the more likely teachers are to give a lower score to the stressful influence of the causes. Among those which follow the general trend of negative correlations, the following causes are significant: maintaining discipline (r = ; p =.022), lack of time to prepare classes (r = ; p =.001), pupils hostility or bad behaviour (r = ; p =.008), lack of facilities and equipment (r = ; p =.010), conflicts with pupils (r = ; p =.008), feelings of inadequacy as a teacher (r = ; p =.008), teaching subjects different from one s own specialization (r = ; p =.001) and carrying out extra duties without sufficient preparation (r = ; p =.024). The exceptions to this trend of stressors decreasing in intensity with age are the following: sense of isolation at work, low status of the teaching profession, lack of interest by parents in their children s schooling, excessive paperwork, low salary, pressure from some parents, the monotony of teaching, teaching as a profession and causes external to teaching. These stressors increase in intensity with the teachers age, but only one, excessive paperwork (r =.1440; p <.000), is significant. Table 2 Correlations between causes of stress and the socio-demographic and professional variable of teacher s age TEACHER S AGE/ CAUSES r p Maintaining discipline Lack of time to prepare classes Hostility or bad behaviour of pupils Lack of facilities and equipment Conflicts with students Feeling inadequate as a teacher Teaching subjects different from one s speciality Carrying out extra tasks without preparation Excessive paperwork.1440 <.000 Table 3 Correlations between causes of stress and the socio-demographic and professional variable of years in service YEARS OF SERVICE/CAUSES r p Low status of the profession Lack of parental interest Excessive paperwork.1723 <.000 Too many pupils in class Conflicts with pupils Feelings of inadequacy Teaching subjects different from one s speciality Excessive contact hours Number of years service shows some parallels with the age variable, with a similar pattern of correlations. It correlates positively and significantly with low status of the profession (r =.0905; p =.035), lack of interest among parents (r =.1046; p =.015) and excessive paperwork (r=.1723; p <.000), while correlating negatively and significantly with having too many pupils per class (r = ; p =.044), conflicts with pupils (r = ; p =.031), feelings of inadequacy (r = ; p =.016), teaching subjects different from one s specialization (r = ; p =.001) and too many contact hours (r = ; p =.036). Size of the school displays mostly non-significant correlations. Only for lack of parental interest (r = ; p =.020) and pressure from parents (r = ; p =.008) were there significant correlations. The educational level variable relates to the different stages of education, from pre-school to secondary (pupils increasing age), in such a way that positive correlations indicate stressors whose levels of intensity rise with educational level (age of pupils), while negative correlations indicate stressors whose intensity is higher for teachers working with younger children. Correlation of the Total Intensity of Causes variable is non-significant and negative, as are the majority of the individual stressors; among these, negative and significant correlations were found for maintaining discipline (r = ; p =.006), excessive demands (r = ; p =.001), lack of time (r = ; p =.005), lack of good atmosphere among teachers (r = ; p =.021), lack of parental interest (r = ; p =.003), excessive paperwork (r = ; p =.001) and lack of facilities and equipment (r = ; p =.027); significant and positive correlations were found for lack of motivation among pupils (r=.0971; p =.018), low expectations of professional promotion (r =.0979; p =.017), too many contact hours (r =.1325; p =.001) and the pressure exerted by some parents (r =.1268; p =.002). Given the fact that the pupils-per-class ratio is one of the indicators most frequently quoted by teachers and trade unions as indication of the quality of the education system, it would seem plausible to expect this variable to display highly significant positive correlations with stressors. However, empirically, this result only arises for excessive number of pupils per class (reasonable) (r=.2305; p <.000) and low salary (r =.1738; p <.000). But what is most interesting is that it displays significant but negative correlations with the following stressors: conflict with other professionals (r =-.1304; p =.001), lack of a good atmosphere among teachers (r = ; p

6 <.000), pupils hostility and bad behaviour (r = ; p =.012), conflicts with pupils (r = ; p =.010), teaching subjects different from one s specialization (r = ; p <.000) and carrying out extra duties without preparation (r = ; p <.000). Finally, number of weeks of sick leave correlates significantly and negatively with the following stressors: pupils hostility or bad behaviour (r = ; p =.022), lack of facilities and equipment (r = ; p =.039), conflicts with pupils (r = ; p =.043), low expectations of professional promotion (r = ; p =.021) and lack of reward and satisfaction at work (r = ; p =.015). The significance levels are very low in all stressors (p >.01). In sum, the correlations displayed by the sociodemographic and professional variables with stressors are complex, varied, fairly inconsistent and, in general of low value, even where significant. The complexity and variety is due to the fact that the global variable summarizing all stressors, Total Intensity of Causes, does not correlate significantly with any of the socio-demographic and professional variables. The lack of consistency derives from the fact that a single variable correlates positively with some stressors and negatively with others, and that the same applies for the stressors. However, three variables maintain a stable direction in cases where significance was found: number of schools correlates positively with all the significant stressors, and size of school and weeks of sick leave correlate negatively with all the significant stressors. The socio-demographic and professional variables that maintain the highest number of significant correlations with the causes of stress are: educational level, years of service, age, and number of pupils. The causes of stress that show the highest number of significant correlations with the socio-demographic variables are: lack of parental interest, excessive paperwork, pupils hostility or bad behaviour, and teaching subjects different from one s specialization. The correlations of the three dimensions of burnout with the causal dimensions are in general rather moderate. Emotional exhaustion correlates positively and significantly with Stability and Globality, and less intensely with Intentionality and Controllability, negatively in the latter case, so that higher levels of emotional exhaustion correspond to perceptions of more stable, global and intentional, but less controllable causes. Depersonalization correlates positively and significantly, above all with Stability, and less so with Locus of Causality, Intentionality and Globality, so that the higher the levels of depersonalization the greater the perceptions of more internal, stable, intentional and global causes. Personal Accomplishment correlates negatively with Stability and Globality, and positively Table 4 Correlations between causes of stress and the socio-demographic and professional variables of school size, educational level and pupils per class SIZE OF SCHOOL/ CAUSES r p Lack of parental interest Pressure from parents EDUCATIONAL LEVEL/ CAUSES r p Maintaining discipline Lack of time Excessive demands Lack of good atmosphere among teachers Lack of parental interest Excessive paperwork Lack of facilities and equipment Low pupil motivation Low expectations of professional promotion Excessive contact hours Pressure from some parents NUMBER OF PUPILS/ CAUSES r p Excessive number of pupils per class.2305 <.000 Low salary.1738 <.000 Conflicts with other professionals Lack of good atmosphere among teachers <.000 Hostility and bad behaviour of pupils Conflicts with pupils Teaching subjects different from one s speciality <.000 Carrying out extra tasks without preparation <.000 Table 5 Correlations between causal dimensions and each of the three burnout variables (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and personal accomplishment) Causal dimensions Emotional Depersonalization Personal exhaustion accomplishment Locus of Causality Significance level (.464) (.018) (.250) Stability Significance level (.000) (.000) (.000) Controllability Significance level (.014) (.289) (.011) Intentionality Significance level (.030) (.012) (.814) Globality Significance level (.000) (.025) (.026) Total Intensity of Causes (.000) (.000) (.000) 71

7 with controllability, so that higher personal accomplishment corresponds to perceptions of less stable (unstable), less global (specific) and more controllable causes. The Total Intensity of Causes variable displays a negative relationship with personal accomplishment and a positive and highly significant one with emotional exhaustion, which is greater than the link to stress in the global study (Manassero et al., 2003); its relationship to depersonalization is somewhat weaker. The analysis of the correlations is highly illustrative, and basically shows the direction of the relationships between each pair of variables (positive or negative) and the intensity of this purely dyadic relationship. It does not tell us about the relationship between two different predictors, or about the relative strength between those two predictors. For this reason, we carried out a multiple Table 6 Multiple regression equation for each of the three burnout variables (exhaustion, depersonalization, personal accomplishment) obtained by introduction of the significant variables forwards step-by-step Variable R R 2 Beta T SigT Dependent variable: EMOTIONAL EXHAUSTION STRESS LEVEL CAUSAL INTENSITY MOTIVATED GROUP-ORIENTED/ SELF-SUFFICIENT (Q2) UNSTABLE/STABLE (C) FRIENDS (Constant) Dependent variable: DEPERSONALIZATION CAUSAL INTENSITY PUPILS LOCUS OF CAUSALITY TOUGH/TENDERMINDEDNESS GROUP-ORIENTED/ SELF-SUFFICIENT (Q2) (Constant) Dependent variable: PERSONAL ACCOMPLISHMENT PUPILS INHIBITED/ENTERPRISING FAMILY GROUP-ORIENTED/ SELF-SUFFICIENT (Q2) STRESS LEVEL RESERVED/OPEN (A) RELAXED/TENSE (Q4) (Constant) R: multiple regression coefficient R 2 : common variance, dependent/predictor variables SE B: standard error of B Beta: standardized regression coefficient T: tolerance 72 regression analysis that permits comparison of the goodness or predictive power of different variables (predictors) with respect to the dependent variable (the three burnout dimensions). The regression analysis was carried out on all the groups of variables measured in the global study (Manassero et al., 2003), using a forward stepwise procedure in the regression equation for the three burnout variables measured with the MBI (Table 6). For each predictor that enters the multiple equation the value of the multiple regression coefficient (R) and the common variance with the dependent variable (R 2 )are shown. The best predictors for emotional exhaustion are, as was expected, first the level of stress, Total Intensity of Causes, social support from friends and motivation, and the personality factors Q2 (group-oriented/selfsufficient) and C (emotionally unstable/stable). Worthy of note in this predictive equation is the inverse relationship between social support of motivation and the C factor, as is the positive, albeit paradoxical relationship of perceived social support from friends, that is, the greater the support from friends, the higher the level of emotional exhaustion. This result lends itself to the interpretation that the social support of friends is perceived by the individual as further social pressure to keep up his or her social image, on top of the pressures already undergone or perceived. Moreover, the intensity of the causes that appears in the regression equation indicates the importance of the causes in burnout, as we found on running a confirmatory factor analysis (Manassero, García-Buades, Vázquez, Ferrer, Ramis & Gili, 2000), in which the causes favour burnout and the intensity of the informed symptoms. The most noteworthy aspect of this regression equation is the high proportion of common variance (55.9%) among the six predictors and the criterion variable corresponding to a high R (.74761). The best predictors of the depersonalization variable are Total Intensity of Causes, social support from pupils, Locus of Causality and the factors Q2 (grouporiented/self-sufficient) and I (tough/tendermindedness). Social support from pupils and factor I are negatively linked to depersonalization, that is, toughmindedness and lower pupil support lead to higher levels of depersonalization, a logical relationship pattern for this variable, given that depersonalization manifests itself through negative and insensitive attitudes towards the receivers of a service, who in this case are pupils. In addition, the appearance of the Locus of Causality dimension in the regression equation comes

8 as confirmation of the initial description of this dimension (Maslach, 1976; Maslach, Schaufeli & Leiter, 2000) as a mechanism of self-protection against the excessive emotional demands of work, given the close relationship between this causal dimension and selfesteem, as well as between causal dimensions and emotional consequences of attribution (Hewstone, 1989; Weiner, 1986). Nevertheless, the predictive power of the predictors in relation to this variable is relatively low, since the proportion of explained variance is small (19%; R=.43543). The prediction equation for personal fulfilment is made up of predictors which, alongside stress level, are essentially social support and personality factors. Higher levels of personal fulfilment, then, are linked to greater pupil and family support, a more enterprising, open, relaxed, group-oriented personality, and a lower level of stress, which makes for a relationship pattern corresponding to the definition given for this variable by the authors of the MBI, and which provides a good diagnostic description for this variable. The proportion of common variance with its predictors is moderate (34%; R=.58265). CONCLUSIONS The most important specific causes of stress and burnout in education in the opinion of teachers are lack of time to prepare lessons, excessively high numbers of pupils in class, low status of the profession, lack of parental interest, pupils lack of motivation, excessive paperwork and pupils hostility or bad behaviour. From the perspective of causal attribution of burnout, the significant and positive relationships appear for the causal dimensions of Stability, Globality and Locus of Causality that is, the more stable, global and internal the stress causes are perceived to be, the higher the level of burnout. On the other hand, the Controllability dimension is linked significantly and negatively to emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, and positively to personal fulfilment. It is well known that internal attribution of a negative situation, as in this case, is directly related to a fall in self-esteem (Hewstone, 1989; Weiner, 1986). This feature affects different aspects of the individual s professional selfconcept and self-image, which leads to doubts about his/her own competence as a teacher and affects expectations of the results of one s work and the motivation to continue (Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998). From the attributional perspective, the most important problem to deal with is that the negative consequences are sustained by the attributions made about the causes of stress, since the causes of stress are perceived as permanent over time (stable) and in all situations (global), so that as long as these attributions do not change, the desperation and helplessness they engender continue to act as self perpetuating causes of stress and its consequences. It will be recalled that the Stability and Globality dimensions are linked to future expectations, and thus to the types of coping response. Therefore, in a collateral way, these attributions can also jeopardize coping: desperation and helplessness generate escape behaviours; this is exactly the opposite of a coping attitude and a desire to change causes or their effects, preventing the use of possible parallel strategies that could be applied to cope with stress and burnout. In this regard, the contributions of the theory of causal attribution to the prevention and/or control of stress and burnout on a general level, irrespective of cases that need personalized clinical treatment, focus on techniques known as attributional retraining (Försterling, 1985, 2001; Manassero & Vázquez, 1995; Manassero et al., 2003; Sampson, 1991), which propose a series of intervention strategies for modifying inappropriate perceptions of stress acquired by teachers. These lead to improved coping with stress and burnout, and convert non-adaptive attributions into adaptive ones. The relationship between antecedents (causes) of stress and consequences that is established through the causal dimensions posited by attribution theory coincides with the fundamental approach to the problem of stress and burnout, so that in the case of burnout and stress the theory of causal attribution provides an ideal framework for describing both the effects of stress and possible coping strategies. Modifying the perception of causes can contribute to preventing and controlling stress and burnout. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study was financed by the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science through the Public Tender for Educational Research Projects. REFERENCES Abramson, L. Y., Seligman, M. E. P. & Teasdale, J. (1978). Lear ned helpless ness in humans: Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, Ben-Zur, H. & Yagil, D. (2005). The relationship between empowerment, aggressive behaviours of customers, coping, and burnout. European Journal of 73

9 work and organizational psychology, 14, Buunk, B.P. & Schaufeli, W.B. (1999). Reciprocity in interpersonal relationships: An evolutionary perspective on its importance for health and wellbeing. In W. Storebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol.10, pp ). Chichester. UK: Wiley. Fornés, J. (1992). Estrés laboral en personal de enfermería: Causas, emociones y posibles predictores. Palma de Mallorca: Universitat de les Illes Balears Försterling, F. (1985). Attributional retraining: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 98, Försterling, F. (2001). Attribution. An introduction to Theories, Research and Applications. East Sussex: Psychology Press. Gil-Monte, P. & Peiró, J.M. (1997). Desgaste psíquico en el trabajo: El síndrome de quemarse. Madrid: Síntesis. Kent, R.L., & Martinko, M.J. (1995). The measurement of attributions in organizational research. In M.J. Martinko (Ed.), Attribution Theory: An organizational perspective. (pp.17-34).fl.: St. Lucie Press. Hewstone, M. (1983). Attribution theory and commonsense explanations: An introductory overview. In M.Hewstone (Ed.), Attribution theory: Social and functional extensions. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Hewstone, M. (1989). Causal attribution. From cognitive processes to collective beliefs. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Manassero, M.A., García-Buades, E., Vázquez, A., Ferrer, V.A., Ramis, C. Y Gili, M. (2000). Análisis causal del burnout en la enseñanza. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 16(2), Manassero, M.A. & Vázquez, A. (1994). Orientación personal mediante técnicas de cambio atribucional aplicadas para la mejora del rendimiento escolar. Revista de Ciencias de la Educación, 160, Manassero, M.A. & Vázquez, A. (1995). Atribución causal aplicada a la orientación escolar. Madrid: MEC-CIDE. Manassero, M.A. & Vázquez, A. (1997). Escala de atribución con cinco dimensiones causales: Desarrollo y validación. Revista de Psicología Social Aplicada, 7, Manassero, M.A., Vázquez, A., Ferrer, V.A., Fornés, J. & Fernández, M.C. (1995). Relaciones entre atribución causal y nivel de estrés en la enseñanza. In M.T.Vega & M.C. Tabernero, (comp.), Psicología Social de la Educación y de la Cultura, Ocio, Deporte y Turismo. Salamanca: Eudema. Manassero, M.A., Vázquez, A., Ferrer, V.A., Fornés, J. & Fernández, M.C. (2003). Estrés y burnout en la enseñanza. Palma de Mallorca. Edicions UIB. Maslach, C. (1976). Burned-out. Human Behaviour, 5, Maslach, C. & Jackson, S.E. (1986, 1981). Maslach Burnout Inven tory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W.B., & Leiter, M.P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, Pines, A. & Aronson, E. (1988). Career Burnout. Causes and Cures. New York: The Free Press. Sampson, E.E. (1991). Social Worlds, Personal Lives. An introduction to Social Psychology. San Diego: HBJ Publishers Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag. 74