4.5 Article

The Mediating Roles of Work-Family Conflict and Facilitation in the Relations Between Leisure Experience and Job/Life Satisfaction Among Employees in Shanghai Banking Industry

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAPPINESS STUDIES
卷 18, 期 6, 页码 1641-1657

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10902-016-9771-8

关键词

Leisure experience; Work-family conflict; Work-family facilitation; Job satisfaction; Life satisfaction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, we explore whether the relationship between leisure experience and job/life satisfaction is mediated by work-family conflict and facilitation, and how these effect coefficients varied among different demographic groups of gender, marital status as well as parental status. With the survey data from 1706 employees in the Shanghai banking industry, we found work-family conflict and facilitation acted as mediators between leisure experience and job/life satisfaction. In all demographic groups, work-family conflict was negatively related with leisure experience and job/life satisfaction. Conversely, work-family facilitation was positively related with leisure experience and job/life satisfaction. Moreover, we found (1) compared with the case for males, the negative effect coefficient of work-family conflict on job satisfaction was significantly higher in female samples. (2) The positive effect coefficients of leisure experience on work-family facilitation was higher for married couples than for unmarried employees. (3) For employees who had children, the negative effect coefficient of leisure experience on work-family conflict as well as the positive effect coefficient of leisure experience on work-family facilitation were significantly higher than for employees who had no children. The results of this study suggest that employees in the banking industry would experience a lower level of work-family conflict and better maintain work-family facilitation by engaging in leisure pursuits with their family. The limitations of this study were discussed as well.

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

4.5
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