In a quasi-experimental study, Munz

In a quasi-experimental study, Munz, Kohler, and Greenberg (2001)
examined the impact of a stress reduction program on emotional well-being
and depression. Their results demonstrated an increase in job performance
among those participants (n
55) who experienced the program compared
with a control group (n
24). Although this provides some support for a
performance–well-being–stressor linkage, it is difficult to determine whether
there was a causal stress process or whether the change was the result of a
generalized halo effect of the program.
Wright and Staw (1999) examined the relationship between measures of
affect and supervisory performance ratings and reported that dispositional
affect (measured via a psychological well-being scale) could significantly
predict rated performance over time. Although the work provides support for
the well-being–productivity relationship, once again the influence of individual
stressors was not included, and the sample was small (N
81) and
specific to a public sector social welfare department.
The majority of other research has been limited to consideration of
burnout. If we take burnout as a means to approximate psychological wellbeing
for now, a number of studies that have examined its relationship to
performance are relevant. Singh, Goolsby, and Rhoads (1994) demonstrated
a relationship between emotional exhaustion and psychological and behavioral
(performance–productivity) outcomes among customer service employees
in a telemarketing company (N
377) using self-report productivity
measures. These measures involved participants comparing their own productivity
with that of their colleagues. Wright and Bonett (1997) also indicated
a negative association between productivity and emotional exhaustion
but failed to show a similar relationship between performance and other
dimensions of burnout. Although their research is useful, it does not overcome
the limitations of sample size and variability previously identified by
Wright et al. (1993), including as it did only a small sample (N
44) of
public sector workers.

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

Dalam studi kuasi-eksperimental, Munz, Kohler dan Greenberg (2001)meneliti dampak dari program pengurangan stres pada kesejahteraan emosionaldan depresi. Hasilnya menunjukkan peningkatan kinerja kerjadi antara peserta (n 55) yang mengalami program ini dibandingkandengan kelompok kontrol (n 24). Meskipun ini menyediakan beberapa dukungan untukkinerja-baik-menjadi-stres hubungan, sangat sulit untuk menentukan apakahada proses sebab-akibat stres atau apakah perubahan adalah hasil dariEfek halo umum program.Wright dan Staw (1999) meneliti hubungan antara ukuranmempengaruhi dan penilaian kinerja pengawas dan dilaporkan bahwa dispositionalmempengaruhi (diukur melalui skala psikologis kesejahteraan) dapat secara signifikanmemprediksi kinerja dinilai dari waktu ke waktu. Meskipun pekerjaan menyediakan dukungan untukhubungan baik-yang-produktivitas, sekali lagi pengaruh individustres tidak disertakan, dan sampel kecil (N 81) dankhusus untuk departemen kesejahteraan sosial sektor publik.Sebagian besar penelitian lain telah terbatas pada pertimbangankelelahan. Jika kita mengambil kelelahan sebagai sarana untuk perkiraan kesejahteraan psikologisuntuk saat ini, beberapa studi yang diperiksa hubungannya dengankinerja relevan. Singh, Goolsby dan Rhoads (1994) menunjukkanhubungan antara kelelahan emosional dan psikologis dan perilakuhasil (kinerja-produktivitas) antara pelanggan layanan karyawandi perusahaan telemarketing (N 377) menggunakan self-laporan produktivitaslangkah-langkah. Peserta terlibat tindakan ini membandingkan produktivitas mereka sendiridengan rekan-rekan mereka. Wright dan Bonett (1997) juga ditunjukkanAsosiasi negatif antara produktivitas dan emosional kelelahantetapi gagal untuk menunjukkan hubungan yang sama antara kinerja dan lainnyadimensi kelelahan. Meskipun penelitian mereka berguna, tidak mengatasiketerbatasan ukuran sampel dan variabilitas yang sebelumnya diidentifikasi olehWright et al. (1993), termasuk sebagai itu hanya contoh kecil (N 44)pekerja sektor publik.