4.7 Article

The effect of work area on work alienation among China's grassroots judicial administrators

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-23526-w

关键词

-

资金

  1. Guangzhou Social Work Research Centre
  2. Guangzhou Municipal Judicial Bureau
  3. Social Construction Committee of Guangdong Provincial People's Congress

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study explores the relationship between work area and work alienation among grassroots judicial administrators and discovers significant results. The findings indicate that education level and the proximity of work area to city centers have an impact on work alienation.
Work alienation refers to mental self-separation from work, and it is an integral reflection of workers and their work. Few studies have explored the association between work area and work alienation among grassroots judicial administrators. A stratified sampling method was used to collect data from 288 grassroots judicial administrators in Guangzhou to measure the overall status quo and work alienation in this group. This study found that the current grassroots judicial administrative team has a reasonable structure, high professional quality, and rich grassroots work experience, but a high level of work intensity (Mean = .667) and a lack of autonomy (Mean = .757) are prominent. Work area (unstandardized regression coefficient, B = .917) is significantly related to work alienation when controlling for sociodemographic and work characteristic variables: the closer the work area is to the city centre areas, the higher the level of work alienation. In addition, education level also has a significant effect on work alienation: the lower the individual education level is, the stronger the work alienation. The discussion focuses on the knowledge needs in grassroots judicial administrative work and the importance of the external working environment, and further research implications are proposed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据