Effectiveness of Training and Reduction of Stress
Effectiveness of Safety Training and the Reduction of Job Stress
Micah Day
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
Table of Contents
Page
List of Tables and Figures3
Abstract4
Introduction5
Background and Significance5
Statement of the problem5
Literature Review6
Rationale of the Study9
Statement of the Hypothesis9
Methods9
Participants9
Instruments10
Qualitative Research Design11
Procedure12
Data Analysis Plan12
Time Schedule13
References15
List of Tables and Figures
TablesPage
- Motivated and Unmotivated Groups12
- Time Schedule13
Figures
- Demographics16
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.
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.
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
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
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
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 orworksite, 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
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
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,
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 DesignGroup Grouping Variable Dependent Variable
Case A (E) (X) 0
Case B (C) 0
Symbols:
(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 (SeeFigure 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
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 pvalue 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 15
2012
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
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.
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. <
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.