Professional well-being: an overview of key concepts and scientific research of the phenomenon

Also in 2010 there was published A. Bakker's conceptual article on subjective well-being in organizations. He explores the circumplex model of affect (J. Russell, 1980, 2003) as a theoretical basis for distinguishing the Subjective well-being components: happiness at work, job satisfaction, work engagement, workaholism and burnout. Job satisfaction is considered as an emotional component of subjective well-being. A consequence of work was the refinement of Russell's circumplex model of subjective well-being [12].

N. Poloski (2015) found out the relationship of «job satisfaction», «work engagement» and «employee loyalty». She emphasizes that most scientists point to the difference between the constructs of «job satisfaction» and «job involvement» (A. J. Wefald & R. G. Downey, 2009, G. M. Alarcon & J. B. Lyons, 2011, D. C. Barnes, J. E. Collier, 2013). However, their causation is poorly understood. In particular, some authors underline that high levels of «job satisfaction» are a positive result of «job involvement» (S. Biswas & J. Bhatnagar, 2013; G. Caesens, F. Stinglhamber and G. Luypaert, 2014; R. Hoigaard, R. Giske & K. Sundsli, 2012; O. M. Karatepe & G. Karadas, 2015; D. Moura, A. Orgambidez-Ramos, G. Goncalves, 2014).

Thus, the «work engagement» can potentially be enhanced by satisfied employees (S. Abraham, 2012a, 2012b). The relationship between «work engagement» and «employee loyalty» is defined by researchers as positive (L. K. Field & J. H. Buitendach, 2011; M. Ibrahim & S. Al Falasi, 2014; W. B. Schaufeli & A. B. Bakker, 2004); the «work engagement» is conceptually and empirically different from «employee loyalty» (D. C. Barnes, J. E. Collier, 2013; U. E. Hallberg & W. B. Schaufeli, 2006); the «work engagement» fosters the «employee loyalty» (W. B. Schaufeli & A. B. Bakker, 2004; A. B. Bakker & E. Demerouti, 2008; J. A. Gruman, A. M. Saks, 2011; L. K. Field & J. H. Buitendach, 2011; Y. Brunetto et al., 2012; S. Biswas & J. Bhatnagar, 2013; D. Moura, A. Orgambidez-Ramos & G. Gon$alves, 2014; S. C. Agarwal, 2014b; R. W. Rice, 2015).

According to the research results, N. Poloski came to the conclusion that the «job satisfaction» has a powerful influence on the «work engagement» and it is insignificant for the «employee loyalty». The «work engagement» as a factor is the mediator between the «job satisfaction» and the «employee loyalty» [30].

The problems of differentiating the «job stress», «organizational stress» and «occupational stress» was studied by V. L. Pankovets. In 2004, against the problem of occupational stress, he proved the fundamental difference between these constructs, noting that job stress (stress at work) arises as a result of complications, related to the working environment (features of the workplace, working conditions, etc.). The reasons for «occupation- al stress» are the «job characteristics», the kind and type of professional activity. «Organizational stress» arises from the negative influence of the characteristics of the organization where the individual is working. These concepts are close, but not synonymous. Therefore, it is important to correctly perceive them in accordance with the tasks [4].

Modern instruments of measuring «occupational well-being» tend to focus on one of three dimensions of affective well-being (positive and negative effects): satisfaction (satisfaction / dissatisfaction) stress (comfort / anxiety) mood (enthusiasm / depression). For example, «job satisfaction» and «work engagement» are associated with the first dimension of pleasure, while tension at work and emotional exhaustion are part of the burnout syndrome, associated with the second (stress) and third (mood) measurement respectively.

Unlike «occupational health», «job satisfaction» and E. Diener's «subjective well being in the workplace», in the 80s multidimensional approaches to the study of professional well-being began to appear, such as «quality of working life» and «occupational well-being».

It is characteristic that «job satisfaction», «affective well-being» and some components of «occupational health» were included as elements into these models. But if the «quality of working life» pays attention to the influence of various characteristics of the working environment on «sub- jective well-being» (E. Diener) or ill-being (their separate components), practically all models of «occupational well-being» try to apply the model of S. Ryff's «psychological well-being» to measure general well-being in the professional sphere.

The «quality of working life» is represented by a whole group of models, taking into account the impact of various factors on the professional well-being such as: job satisfaction, pay satisfaction and relationships with colleagues and the factors, generally reflecting life satisfaction and overall feeling of well-being (K. Danna and R. W. Griffin, 1999) [15]. For example, stress related to work and the relationship between working and non-working areas of life (K. A. Loscocco & A. N. Roschelle, 1991) were also identified as factors that should be included in the approach of the «quality of working life».

The most famous models, related specifically to the quality of working life, are the following: Job Characteristics Model (J. R. Hackman, G. R. Oldham, 1974, 1980); The quality of working life (J. C. Taylor, 1979; P. H. Mirvis & E. E. Lawler, 1984); Job Demand-Control Model (JD-C) R. A. Karasek (R. A. Karasek, 1979; J. Johnson and E. Hall, 1988; R. A. Karasek and T. Theorell, 1990); Effort-Reward Imbalance (ERI) Model J. Siegrist (J. Siegrist, 1996); The Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model A. B. Bak- ker (A. B. Bakker & E. Demerouti, 2007); etc, (V. V. Baba & M. Jamal, 1991; M. J. Sirgy, D. Efraty, P. Siegel & D. Lee, 2001; N. Ellis & A. Pompli, 2002).

But only four of them were particularly successful in the area of empirical research: Job Characteristics Model; The Demand-Control-Support Model; The Job Demands-Resources model; The Effort-Reward Imbalance Model [22].

Despite the differences between these approaches, all of the models suggest the presence of linear relation between the «job characteristics» and parameters of professional well-being. For example, «autonomy» at work linearly related to «job satisfaction»: the more autonomy the worker feels, the more «job satisfaction» he/she experiences.

Also, researchers of the «quality of working life» approach, differ in their views on the structure of this phenomenon [34]. For example, the above model by J. R. Hackman, G. R. Oldham (1974) suggests that the high «quality of working life», namely the positive attitude and high working results (high internal motivation, high job satisfaction, high quality of performance and low absenteeism) depend on the availability of three «critical psychological conditions»: a sense of work comprehension, a sense of responsibility for the work results, as well as knowledge of the results of the work.

J. C. Taylor (1979) turned out to be more pragmatic in defining the main components of «quality of working life». As the main external factors, he determined: wages/salary, hours and working conditions, and as internal - the concept of job characteristics and features of the work itself. He suggested that, depending on the type of organization and group of employees, the quality of working life model can be supplemented by a whole range of other aspects, for example: individual power, employee participation in the management, fairness and equity, social support, use of one's present skills, self-development, a meaningful future at work, social relevance of the work or product, effect on extra work activities, etc.

P. H. Mirvis and E. E. Lawler (1984) suggested that the «quality of working life» is associated with satisfaction in pay, hours and working conditions. They described such «basic elements of good quality of working life»: safe work environment, equitable wages/salary, equal employment opportunities opportunities for advancement, opportunities to learn and grow, protection of individual rights.

The Demand-Control-Support Model by R. A. Karasek measures the level of occupational stress as professional ill-being (occupational health). Model works with three main dimensions: job demands, job decision latitude and job social support. According to the model, professions, characterized by high demands, low freedom in decision making and low social support, have a higher risk of psychological distress and cardiovascular disease of employees [21].

The continuation of this model was the Job Demand-Control Model (J. Johnson and E. Hall, 1988). This model could already predict and explain the work-related stress and motivation and be focused on two important aspects: job demands (workload, speed of implementation, deadlines, mental stress, workload coordination, the presence of conflicting requirements, etc.) and job control (freedom in making decisions, the ability to act on your own, to monitor the situation, to have support from colleagues, etc.) [21].

The model defines a two-way linear relationship, namely that professions, characterized by high demands (for example, there are overloads) and a small amount of control (that is, autonomy), cause strong stress reactions or stress (for example, physical or mental exhaustion) and vice versa [21].

Also within the framework of the model it is established that motivation, learning, and personal growth will be the highest in professions, characterized by high demands and high control.

Although the JD-C model was very popular in the 80-90s, in the subsequent experiments a number of limitations were revealed. In general, epidemiological studies, aimed at long-term health effects, have found more support for this model than self-report studies, aimed at a wide variety of stress reactions (D. C. Ganster & J. M. Schaubroeck, 1991) [21].

A linear relationship is also observed in J. Siegrist's Effort-Reward Imbalance Model. J. Siegrist introduces the concept of a «work contract» and notes that efforts at work should be rewarded (money, respect and career opportunities, including job security). The model determines that there can not be reciprocity between employees and management, with high efforts made by employees and low rewards received in turn, it will most likely lead to negative emotions and sustained stress responses of the employees to the stress. Conversely, it leads to positive emotions, evoked by appropriate social rewards, promotes well-being, health and survival. The main components of the model are: Effort scale (physical load, time pressures, breaks, responsibility, over labor) and Reward scale (money, respect and security, career opportunities).

An alternative to the previous models was The Job Demands-Resources model by A. B. Bakker. The model has a very wide range of working conditions in the analysis of organizations and employees. Although the model measures the level of occupational stress as «ill-being» (occupational health approach), it includes both negative and positive indicators of well-being. The main components of the model are: Job Demands (physical, psychological, social, organizational aspects of the work requiring effort - the amount of work, the speed of its implementation, deadlines, mental load, coordination load, the presence of conflicting requirements, etc.); Job Resources (physical, psychological, social, organizational aspects of work that do not require effort - career opportunities, coaching leader, role clarity, autonomy).

V. V. Baba i M. Jamal (1991) listed «typical indicators» of the «quality of working life», including: job satisfaction, job involvement, work role ambiguity, work role conflict, work role overload, job stress, organizational commitment and turn-over intentions. They also examined the routinization of labor content, suggesting that this aspect should be investigated within the framework of the «quality of working life» concept.

Sirgy and others (2001) [28] suggested that the key factors in the «quality of working life» are: satisfaction need, based on job requirements, satisfaction need, based on work environment, satisfaction need, based on supervisory behaviour, satisfaction need, based on ancillary programmes, organizational commitment.

Some researchers argue that the component composition of the working life quality can vary depending on the profession. So, for example, S. Bearfield (2003) used 16 questions to study the working life quality and the differences between the reasons for the dissatisfaction of various professionals: clerks, salesmen and service workers, indicating that various problems may have to be addressed separately for different groups.

One of the modern tools for measuring the working life quality is a relatively new method of Work-Related Quality of Life scale (WRQoL) [37].

The structure of WRQoWL [17] model includes six main Components: Job and Career Satisfaction - the emotional attitude of the employee to work; Working Conditions - assessment of satisfaction with basic resources, working and safety conditions; General Well-Being - assessing well-being outside the work environment. It is assumed that general well-being affects professional well-being, for example depression and anxiety disorders are common and can have a significant impact on professional well-being; Home-Work Interface - measures the extent to which the employer is perceived as something that supports families and family life of employees; Stress at Work - assessing the level of stress at work; Control at Work is an assessment of the degree of freedom of speech and the ability to be involved in decision-making at work [37].

According to the followers of the approach of «quality of working life», job satisfaction or dissatisfaction essentially lies in its perception, rather than simply reflects the objective reality. In addition, the perception of a person can depend on the comparison of acquired ideals, aspirations and expectations, for example, with the current state of the individual (E. E. Lawler and L. W. Porter, 1966).

On this issue there was published the monograph by E. Y. Rohov and the authors (2014), entitled The Modern Paradigm of Research of Professional Representations [8], studying the professional representations of the subject of activity, the role of professional representations in the regulation of activity and the peculiarities of the formation of professional notions about the object of activity.

In an empirical study, correlation relationships were found between the indicators of professional ethics and emotional burnout. It is revealed that professional representations can contain both emotional, cognitive and behavioral components of professional interaction. Also they can influence the various components of subjective well-being or ill-being: performance, involvement, competence, job satisfaction. Also, it was confirmed that the professional representations of students are related to the level of their self-esteem.

Regarding the approach of «occupational well-being», its researchers were focusing on its application in a professional context of the modernized versions of the model of psychological well-being by C. Ryff, whose multi-factor structure has 6 components: Self-Acceptance, Personal Growth, Purpose in Life, Positive Relations, Environmental Mastery and Autonomy [31].

Among the most famous models of «occupational well-being» we can distinguish those suggested by P. Uorr (1987, 1994); J. E. Van Horn, T. W. Taris, W. B. Schaufeli, B. Wilmar, P. J. G. Schreurs, J. G. Paul (2003) M. L. Schultz (2008); K. Rut (2016).

One of the most well-known approaches to the study of well-being in the context of professional activity is the model of occupational well-being by P. Warr (1987, 1990, 1990b, 1994), developed by analogy with the psychological well-being model by C. Ryff (1986), considering well-being in the context of professional activities, as conditioned by its conditions and content. The components of P. Warr's model of occupational well-being are: affective well-being, subjective competence, autonomy and subjective aspiration, and the fifth component is «integrated functioning», reflecting the person as a whole. Integrated functioning can be defined as a general assessment, covering the first four components.

Particular attention is paid by P. Warr to such a component as affective well-being. Peter Warr was the first to adapt the job-related affective well-being model. By analogy with J. Russell's two-dimensional emotional experience circular model (1980, 2003), P. Warr's model of professional emotional well-being includes 3 affective partners: pleasure / dissatisfaction, comfort / job-related anxiety and enthusiasm / emotional exhaustion.

As for other components of P. Warr's models, «subjective competence» encompasses a person's ability to cope with problems and influence the environment with a highly ambitious success. «Autonomy» refers to the extent to which people can withstand environmental demands and follow their own thoughts and actions. P. Warr (1987) notes that too much, and too little autonomy can led to negative consequences. «Subjective aspira- tion» refers to people, showing interest in others, participating in motivated activities and also striving to improve themselves.

This aspect of psychological well-being in the professional sphere was emphasized by various researchers, such as: F. Herzherg (1966), investigating the influence of features of «psychological growth» on the work of employees, A. Maslow (1973), developing a similar perspective from the standpoint of «self - actualizarion», as well as M. Csikszentmihaiyi (1975) and A. Kornhauser (1965). Low aspiration is manifested in apathy and in confirming the status quo, regardless of satisfaction. А wish to work related refers to the extent to which a person seeks difficult goals in his/her work.

Separately, we will determine the contribution of P. Warr to studies of the influence of the context of professional activity on the affective well-being. His «vitamin theory» which can be attributed to the direction of «quality of working life», defines 9 (12) key job characteristics, but, unlike the «quality of working life» models, postulates a nonlinear relationship between the job characteristics and the level of the affective well-being [22].

The latest attempt to test Warr's vitamin model was made by the German scientist S. Meyerding. In 2015, he reproduced the studies and identified 28 factors, affecting job satisfaction [28]. S. Meyerding claims that his predecessors tested outdated models by P. Warr, for example De Jonge (1998) tested Warr's vitamin model using an outdated version with nine vitamins (P. Warr, 1994), the current model includes 12 vitamins ( P. Warr, 2007, 2013) [28; 38]. But S. Meyerding tried to imbed out the measurements and investigated the 28 factors model. According to him, there are different approaches to measuring subjective well-being at work. But if job satisfaction is measured in different aspects, the outcome of the evaluation will depend on what aspects will be included in the model (organizational, personal, etc.).

According to S. Meyerding, most aspects of the job characteristics are reliably correlated with job satisfaction. The correlation with job satisfaction was the highest significant one with the «good prospects for the future» factor, indicating the importance of informing and communicating with the employees about future plans. A sense of progress on the way to a better future influences job satisfaction. There was also a positive relationship between the organization's morality and job satisfaction, affecting the employee's sustainability index.

When studying the occupational well-being, the work by P. Cotton (2003) on the relations of occupational well-being and labor performance is very important [14]. P. Cotton notes that occupational well-being depends on the key organizational and personal factors, affecting occupational well-being. A high level of occupational well-being positively affects labor performance.

According to P. Cotton, the negative and positive aspects of occupational well-being (morale and stress level) are independent, and personal factors have a greater impact on stress level than organizational ones. The organizational climate is the strongest factor, determining positive emotions (morale) [14].

The model, suggested by J. E. Van Horn [36] is outstanding in the occupational well-being. Based on the models by P. Warr (1987, 1994) and C. Ryff (1989), J. E. Van Horn developed a multidimensional model of occupational well-being, including affective, cognitive, professional, social and psychosomatic components: C. Ryff - self-acceptance; P. Warr - Affective well-being (anxiety, depression); Professional well-being (motivation) (C. Ryff - Personal growth, Purpose in life, Autonomy; P. Warr - Aspiration, Competence, Autonomy); Social well-being (behavior) (C. Ryff - Environmental mastery, Positive relations with others); Cognitive well-being and Psychosomatic well-being (D. E. Broadbent, P. F. Cooper, P. FitzGerald & K. R. Parkes, 1982; T. W. Taris, P. J. G.Schreurs & I. J. Van Iersel-Silfhout, 2001) [36].

J. E. Van Horn's model was developed with the model by A. Baldschun (2014), proposing a 6-component model of occupational well-being: affective, social, cognitive, professional, personal and psychosomatic well-being [13].

Separately, it is necessary to define the works by M. L. Schultz (2008) and K. Rut (2016) [9; 33], developing their own «occupational» and «professional» well-being models on the basis of C. Ryff's Psychological Well-Being Scales (PWB). The model by M. L. Schult differentiates the concepts of «organizational climate», «job satisfaction» and «occupation- al well-being», also distinguishing 6 components of the «occupational well-being»: positive organizational relationships, professional self- acceptance, job autonomy, job purpose, environmental mastery and job growth.

M. L. Schultz separates his approach from those, initiated by his predecessors and proposes the revised C. Ryff's Psychological Well-Being Scales (PWB, 1986), having been previously ignored in the study of occupational well-being, but the most theoretically processed and based on various theories of the optimal well-being of a person.

Kateryna Rut (2016) developed and tested a model of professional well-being, relying on the research by C. Ryff. She offered a questionnaire for assessing the professional well-being and defined its 4-component structure: «Professional Development» (sub-scales: «Professional Goals» and «Professional Growth»); «Positive relations with colleagues»; «Professional self-acceptance» (sub-scales: «Satisfaction with the level of competence» and «Satisfaction with professional achievements»); «Autonomy in professional activity» [9].

The work by Yu. P. Povarenkov, who in 2006 reviewed the main approaches to the problem of identity and introduced the concept of «professional identity» [6] also deserves attention as it treats professional identity as a state of the individual, one of the criteria for his/her professionalization, the process of professional development regulator. Professional identity is a special type of social identity, exhausted by the adoption of appropriate professional roles and functions. It can not be reduced to self-identity, because treating oneself as a professional is only one of the indicators of a formed professional identity. Yu. P. Povarenkov (2014) identifies three basic parameters for assessing professional identity: the acceptance of the professional community values, acceptance of oneself as a professional and the adoption of professional activity as a means of self-realization [6].

This construct has generalized the entire diversity of individual, personal and professional factors, combined with satisfactory performance characteristics (organizational and contextual factors), contributing to professional well-being.

Conclusions

The article investigates four basic and several intermediate concepts of the «professional well-being»: occupational health, job satisfaction, affective well-being, quality of working life, occupational well-being.

The analysis of modern and classical research gives grounds to apply the concept of «professional well-being» to denote the general state of the positive functioning of the individual (psychological well-being) in the professional sphere, as it accurately reflects the essence of this phenomenon, in contrast to the construct of «occupational well-being», which is common to any professions and does not reflect the professional specifics of the perception of the world.

Due to the fact that various aspects of the professional well-being are measured with the help of both subjective (self-assessment) and objective methods (objective psychodiagnostic measurements), we suggest using these notations only to distinguish the methods of evaluation used.

Despite the diversity of approaches to professional well-being, almost all of them were formed under the influence of the concepts of «subjective» and «psychological» well-being (N. Bradburn, E. Diener, C. Ryff) and they try to define common universal criteria and composition of components of «professional well-being».

The difference between constructs of general psychological well-being and professional well-being is obvious. If the first one has universal criteria (the state of optimal functioning) and needs to find a universal structure, recent studies indicate significant differences in the structure of the professional well-being characteristic of various professional groups and the factors, influencing it.

Modern attempts to directly combine the models of derivatives by C. Ryff and E. Diener can not solve the issue of the difference between professional expectations, the hierarchy of values and other psychological characteristics typical for representatives of various professional groups, leading to the need for each profession to develop a separate model of professional well-being or to essentially change the existing ones, as well as to determine the influence of various factors on it.

To date, there are no universal dynamic tools for assessing the level of professional well-being, taking into account the factors characteristic of different professional groups, which could make it possible to accurately track and correct working conditions to specific professional expectations.

Prospects for further research. The prospect of further research lies in the direction of investigating the content and structure of the professional well-being, characteristic of various professional groups, and the impact on it of various factors, as well as in developing own empirical model for the realization of the research objective.

professional well being

References

1. Аргайл М. Психология счастья / M. Аргайл. - СПб.: Питер, 2003. - 271 с.

2. Березовская Р. А. Профессиональное благополучие: проблемы и перспективы психологических исследований [Электронный ресурс] / Р. А. Березовская // Психологические исследования: [электрон. науч. журн.]. - 2016. - Т. 9, № 45. - С. 2. - Режим доступа: http://psystudy.ru/index.php/num/2016v9n45/1232- berezovskaya45.html

3. Иванова Т. Ю. Структура и диагностика удовлетворенности трудом: разработка и апробация методики / Т. Ю. Иванова, Е. И. Рассказова, Е. Н. Осин // Организационная психология. - 2012. - Т. 2, № 3. - С. 2-15.

4. Паньковець В. Л. Психологічний аналіз професійного стресу в освітніх організаціях / В. Л. Паньковець // Синдром «професійного вигорання» та професійна кар'єра працівників освітніх організацій: тендерні аспекти: навч. посіб. для вищ. навч. закл. / [за наук. ред. С. Д. Максименка, Л. М. Карамушки, Т. В. Зайчикової]. К.: Міленіум, 2004. - С. 18-39.

5. Патрушев В. Д. Задоволеність працею: соціально-економічні аспекти / В. Д. Патрушев, Н. А. Калмакан. - М.: «Економіка», 1993. - 203 c.

6. Поваренков Ю. П. Психологическая характеристика профессиональной идентичности субъекта труда / Ю. П. Поваренков // Вестник КГУ им. Н. А. Некрасова. - 2014. - Т. 20. - С. 9-16.

7. Погарская В. А. Взаимосвязь субъективного благополучия и ценностно-смысловой сферы личности у студентов педагогических профессий / В. А. Погорская // Вектор науки ТГУ. Серия: Педагогика, психология. - 2011. - № 3 (6). - C. 252.

8. Рогов Е. И. Современная парадигма исследования профессиональных представлений: монография / Е. И. Рогов, И. Г. Антипова, С. В. Жолудева // Южный федерал. ун-т, Каф. орг. и приклад. психологии. - 2014. - 250 с.

9. Рут Е. И. Профессиональное благополучия сотрудников коммерческих организаций: критерии и методика оценки: автореф. дис. магистр. психол. наук: 030300 «Организационная психология и психология менеджмента» / Е. И. Рут. Санкт-Петербург, 2016. - 172 c.

10. Шамионов Р. М. Субъективное благополучие личности: этнопсихологический аспект / Р. М. Шамионов // Проблемы социальной психологии личности. 2008. - С. 45-52.

11. Ядов В. А. Удовлетворенность работой: анализ эмпирических обобщений и попытка их теоретического истолкования / В. А. Ядов, А. А. Киссель // Социологические исследования. - 1974. - № 1. - С. 78-87.

12. Bakker A. B. Subjective well-being in organizations / A. B. Bakker, W. G. M. Oerlemans ; [In: K. Cameron, G. Spreitzer (Eds.)] // Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship. - 2011. - P. 178-189.

13. Baldschun A. The Six Dimensions of Child Welfare Employees' Occupational Well-Being / A. Baldschun // Nordic journal of working life studies. - 2014. - № 4 (4). - P. 69-87.

14. Cotton P. Occupational well-being and performance. A review of organizational health research / P. Cotton, P. M. Hart // Australian Psychologist. - 2003. - № 38 (2). - P. 118-127.

15. Danna K. Health and well-being in the workplace: A review and synthesis of the literature / K. Danna, R. W. Griffin // Journal of Management. - 1999. - № 25. - P. 357-384.

16. Diener E. Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and life satisfaction / E. Diener, R. Lucas, S. Oishi ; [In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.)] // The handbook of positive psychology. - 2002. - P. 63-73.

17. Easton S. User Manual for the Work-Related Quality of Life (WRQoL) Scale / S. Easton, D. Van Laar // University of Portsmouth. - 2012. - URL: http://www. qowl.co.uk/researchers/WRQoL%20User%20manual%20v38%20ebook%2003%20 Nov14.pdf

18. Hackman J. R. Motivation through design of work. Organizational behaviour and human performance / J. R. Hackman, G. R. Oldham. - 1976. - № 16 (2). - P. 250-279.

19. Herzberg F. The Motivation to Work. New York: Wiley / F. Herzberg, B. Mausner, B. B. Snyderman. - New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1959. - 157 p.

20. Higgins E. T. When do self-discrepancies have specific relations to emotions? The second-generation question of Tangney, Niedenthal, Covert, and Barlow (1998) / E. T. Higgins // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. - 1999. - № 77 (6). - P. 1313-1317.

21. Janssen P. P. M. A Test and Refinement of the Demand-Control-Support Model in the Construction Industry / P. P. M. Janssen, A. B. Bakker, A. de Jong // International Journal of Stress Management. - 2001. - Vol. 8, № 4. - P. 315-332.

22. Jonge J. D. Job Characteristics and Employee Well-Being: A Test of Warr's Vitamin Model in Health Care Workers Using Structural Equation Modelling / Jan De Jonge, W B. Schaufeli // Journal of Organizational Behavior. - 1998. - № 19 (4). - P. 387-407.

23. Judge T. A. Job Satisfaction and Subjective Well-Being at work / T. A. Judge, R. Klinger // The science of subjective well-being. - 2008. - P. 393-413.

24. Judge T. A. The dispositional causes of job satisfaction: A core evaluations approach / T. A. Judge, E. A. Locke, C. C. Durham // Research in Organizational Behavior. - 1997. - № 19. - P. 151-188.

25. Latham G. P. The study of work motivation in the 20th century / G. P. Latham, M. H. Budwort ; [In L. L. Koppes (Ed.)] // Historical perspectives in industrial and organizational psychology. - 2007. - P. 353-381.

26. Locke E. A. The nature and causes of job satisfaction / E. A. Locke ; [In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.)] // Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. -1976. - P. 1297-1349.

27. Mayo E. Hawthorne and the Western Electric Company. The Social Problems of an Industrial Civilization / E. Mayo. - London: Routledge, 1949. - P. 161-170.

28. Meyerding S. Job characteristics and job satisfaction: A test of Warr's vitamin model in German horticulture / S. Meyerding // The Psychologist-Manager Journal. - 2015. - Vol. 18 (2). - P. 86-107.

29. Moynihan L. M. The Influence of Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment on Executive Withdrawal and Performance / L. M. Moynihan, W. R. Boswell, J. W. Boudreau // Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies. - Cornell University, 2000. - P. 80.

30. Poloski V. N. The triad of job satisfaction, work engagement and employee loyalty The interplay among the concepts / V. N. Poloski, T. Hernaus // EFZG Working Papers Series 1507, Faculty of Economics and Business. - University of Zagreb, 2015. - 13 p.

31. Ryff C. D. Psychological well-being: Meaning, measurement, and implications for psychotherapy research / C. D. Ryff, B. Singer // Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics. - 1996. - № 65. - P. 14-23.

32. Schaufeli W. B. Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Preliminary Manual / W. B. Schaufeli, A. B. Bakker // Department of Psychology. - The Netherlands: Utrecht University, 2003. - 58 p.

33. Schultz M. L. Occupational well-being: the development of a theory and a measure / M. L. Schultz // Front Cover. ProQuest. - 2008. - 183 p.

34. Sirgy M. J. A new measure of quality of work life (QoWL) based on need satisfaction and spillover theories / M. J. Sirgy, D. Efraty, P. Siegel, D. Lee // Social Indicators Research. - 2001. - № 55. - P. 241-302.

35. Staw B. M. The dispositional approach to job satisfaction: More than a mirage, but not yet an oasis: comment / B. M. Staw, Y. Cohen-Charash // Journal of Organizational Behavior. - 2005. - № 26 (1). - P. 59-78.

36. Van Horn. The structure of occupational well-being: a study among Dutch teachers / V. Horn, J. E. Taris, T. W. Schaufeli, W. B. Schreurs, J. G. Paul // Published in Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. - 2004. - Vol. 77. - 365 p.

37. Van Laar D. Work-Related Quality of Life scale for healthcare workers / D. Van Laar, J. Edwards, S. Easton // Journal of Advanced Nursing. - 2007. - Vol. 60, № - P. 325-333.

38. Warr P. How to Think About and Measure Psychological Well-being / P. Warr ; [In: M. Wang, R. R. Sinclair, L. E. Tetrick (Eds.)] // Research Methods in Occupational Health Psychology: Measurement, Design and Data Analysis. -2013. - P. 76-90.

Размещено на Allbest.ru