AD ALTA
JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH
M
an
Count
62
94
35
11
% within
gender
30,7% 46,5% 17,3%
5,4%
% within
emotional
stress
27,9% 22,2% 18,6%
22,9%
Total
Count
222
423
188
48
% within
gender
25,2% 48,0% 21,3%
5,4%
% within
emotional
stress
100,0% 100,0% 100,0% 100,0%
The same situation can be observed in the category of emotional
stress, where the overall distribution is proportionally similar.
Tab. 10 Percentual comparison of the groups in the category
exhaustion index
Exhaustion index
Extremely
bad
bad
standard good
The
best
G
en
d
er
W
o
m
an
Count
86
285
257
24
27
% within
gender
12,7%
42,0%
37,8%
3,5% 4,0%
% within
exhaustion
Index
66,7%
77,4%
80,8%
85,7%
71,1
%
% of Total
9,8%
32,3%
29,2%
2,7% 3,1%
ma
n
Count
43
83
61
4
11
% within
gender
21,3%
41,1%
30,2%
2,0% 5,4%
% within
exhaustion
Index
33,3%
22,6%
19,2%
14,3%
28,9
%
% of Total
4,9%
9,4%
6,9%
0,5% 1,2%
Total
Count
129
368
318
28
38
% within
gender
14,6%
41,8%
36,1%
3,2% 4,3%
% within
exhaustion
Index
100,0% 100,0% 100,0% 100,0%
100,0
%
% of Total
14,6%
41,8%
36,1%
3,2% 4,3%
In this category is obvious that both genders differ – only 12.7 %
of women reached extremely bad exhaustion index when
compared to 21.3 % of all participating men. The outcomes in
other categories are much closer to each other from the gender
point of view.
5 Discussion
Based on the obtained outcomes we summarize that there were
881 participants from 24 districts of Slovakia in our research.
Non-representative proportion of men to women in the research
remains a possible threat regarding deformation of some
outcomes. A typical feature across whole sample was an
extremely high index of exhaustion; 14.4 % of respondents with
very bad and 41.8 % with bad index of exhaustion. When taking
a deeper look, we see 12.7 % of women and up to 21.3 % of men
with very bad exhaustion index. Unfortunately, only 3.2 % of all
respondents reached good and 4.3 % the best exhaustion index.
These numbers are really alarming since the Institute of Public
Health and the European Agency for Occupational Health and
Safety officially announced that the stress was the second most
frequent health problem across all Europe and the reason causing
very high number of sick leaves. According to their findings,
there is no difference between men and women, and our
outcomes practically confirmed this information. There was no
statistically significant difference between genders in any
observed variables in the categories of both emotional and
physical stress. The biggest and statistically most significant
differences were found in the category – region of our
respondents, or, in other words, the place where they live. Since
we did not concentrate on the reasons for those differences, we
cannot say where the origin of this problem lies. Generally, we
can confirm that the highest stress level, both emotional and
physical one, was measured among respondents from regions of
Nové Zámky and Šaľa.
5.1 Conclusion and restrictions in our research
Our treatise brings transparent elaboration of indicators of
exhaustion index, physical and emotional stress and the overall
stress rate within observed sample. Obtained data describe
contemporary situation in the frame of Slovakia.
Possible limits of our research:
inadequate representativeness of the sample can be
negatively reflected in the measurement outcomes,
we were dealing only with volunteers who were willing to
undergo this examination, so our outcomes might be a bit
out of focus since those volunteers probably were people
who particularly felt some problems regarding stress,
another research limit was that we did not deal with the
analysis of reasons causing stress among respondents.
Literature:
1. Brockert, S.: Ovládaní stresu. Praha: Melanrich, 1993. ISBN
80-7023-159-9.
2. Cannon, W. B.: Bodily changes in pain, hunger, fear and
rage. Oxford, England: Appleton, 1915.
3. Čírtková, L.: Policejní psychologie. Praha: Portál, 2000. ISBN
80-7178-475-3.
4. Glasser, M.A.: Labor looks at work stress. In L. W. Krinsky,
S. N. Kieffer , P. A. Carone, & S. F. Yolles (Eds.), Stress and
productivity
(pp. 55—64). New York: Human Sciences
Press. Google Scholar 1984.
5. Grinker, R.R., Spiegel, J.P.: Men under Stress. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1945.
6. Hennig, C., Keller, G.
Anistresový program pro učitele. Praha:
Portál, 1995. ISBN 80-7178-093-6.
7. Jex, S. M.: Stress and job performance: Theory, research, and
implications for managerial practice. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications, 1998. ISBN 978-0761909248.
8. Kasáčová, B.: Učieľ, profesia a príprava. Banská Bystrica:
PdF, UMB. 2002. ISBN 80-8055-702-0
9. Maslach C, Leiter M.P.: The Truth About Burnout. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997. ISBN 978-1118692134
10. McGuigan, F.J.: Encyclopedia of Stress. Richmond:
Ergodeooks, 1999. ISBN 978-0205178766
11. Minirth, F., Hawkins, D., Meir, P., Flournoy, R.: How to
beat burnout. Chicago : Moody Press. Google Scholar. 1986.
12. Nákonečný, M. Lexikon psychologie. Praha: Vodnář. 1995.
ISBN 80-25255-74-X.
13. Paulík, K.: Psychologie lidské odolnosti. Praha: Grada
Publishing, 2010. ISBN 978-80-247-2959-6.
14. Selye, H.: Stress without distress. Philadelphia, PA: J.B.
Lippincott Co, 1974.
15. Selye, H.: The Stress Concept: Past, Present and Future. In:
Cooper, C.L., Ed., Stress Research Issues for the Eighties, New
York: John Wiley & Sons, 1-20. 1983.
16. Vágnerová, M.: Psychopatologie pro pomáhající profese.
Praha : Portál, 1999. ISBN 80-7178-678-0.
Primary Paper Section: A
Secondary Paper Section: AN, AQ, FP
- 23 -