The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0951-354X.htm

Determinants of
Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs, job satisfaction
self-esteem, and job stress as
determinants of job satisfaction
Eithne Reilly 365
School of Arts, Dublin Business School, Dublin, Ireland
Received 15 April 2013
Katie Dhingra Revised 24 May 2013
Business School, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, UK, and 17 June 2013
Accepted 19 June 2013
Daniel Boduszek
Department of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Huddersfield,
Huddersfield, UK

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of teaching self-efficacy, perceived stress,
self-esteem, and demographic characteristics (age, gender, education, and years of teaching
experience) in predicting job satisfaction within a sample of 121 Irish primary school teachers.
Design/methodology/approach – Survey data were collected from teachers from eight primary
schools. Hypotheses were tested using a comparison of means, correlations, and multiple
regression.
Findings – Results indicated that the predictor variables accounted for 22 per cent of variance in
teachers’ job satisfaction. However, only perceived stress was found to explain unique predictive
variance, with high levels of occupations stress related to low levels of job satisfaction.
Practical implications – Perceived stress should be targeted in efforts to improve teachers’ job
satisfaction.
Originality/value – The results make an additional contribution to the literature by providing
important information on the factors contributing to teachers’ job satisfaction in Ireland.
Keywords Job satisfaction, Ireland, Self-esteem, Self-efficacy, Teachers, Job stress
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Job satisfaction is defined as “a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from
the appraisal of one’s job or job experiences” (Locke, 1976, p. 1304). Previous research
indicates that job satisfaction is crucial, due to its associations with work
performance, physical and mental health, and career decisions (Caprara et al., 2003,
2006; Fritzsche and Parrish, 2005; Judge et al., 2001; Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2009).
Teachers dissatisfied with their work display lower work commitment, negatively
impact on student motivation through emotional contagion (Hatfield et al., 1993),
may fail to satisfy their student’s needs for autonomy and competence (Ryan and
Deci, 2000; Klusmann et al., 2008), and are at greater risk of leaving the profession
(Ingersoll, 2001).
Gender has frequently been examined as a predictor of teacher job satisfaction
(e.g. Crossman and Harris, 2006; Ma and MacMillan, 1999; Michaelowa, 2002). International Journal of Educational
However, the nature of this relationship remains unclear. Some studies report that Management
Vol. 28 No. 4, 2014
female teachers are more satisfied in their work than male teachers (De Nobile pp. 365-378
r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
and McCormick, 2008; Ma and MacMillan, 1999; Spear et al., 2000); whereas, others 0951-354X
(e.g. Bishay, 1996; Mwamwenda, 1997) report the opposite, or no association DOI 10.1108/IJEM-04-2013-0053
IJEM (e.g. Sargent and Hannum, 2005). Studies examining the relationship between age
28,4 and job satisfaction have also reported conflicting results. Several studies have found
a positive relationship between job satisfaction and age (e.g. Lee and Wilbur, 1985).
Others suggest a U-shaped or non-significant relationship (Crossman and Harris, 2006;
Mertler, 2002).
Contradictory evidence also exists regarding the relationship between years of
366 teaching and job satisfaction. Gosnell (2000) found a negative relationship between
years of teaching and job satisfaction; whereas, Bishay (1996) found a positive
relationship. Several studies (e.g. Crossman and Harris, 2006; Dabo, 1998; De Nobile
and McCormick, 2008; Michaelowa, 2002) also suggest no experience-based differences
in job satisfaction.
Teacher stress may be defined as “the experience by a teacher of unpleasant,
negative emotions, such as anger, anxiety, tension, frustration or depression”
(Kyriacou, 2001, p. 28) which results from the occupation demands of teaching,
as well as the degree of mismatch between these demands and an individual’s ability to
cope with them. Stress among teachers is a widespread, and perhaps increasing,
problem (Boyle et al., 1995; Chaplain, 2008; Kyriacou, 2001; Liu and Onwuegbuzie,
2012). One study found that up to one-quarter of teachers perceive their occupation
to be “highly stressful” (Borg, 1990).
A substantial amount of literature suggests that the prolonged experience of
occupational stress may lead to temporary and chronic illness, burnout (a state of
emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation, and reduced personal accomplishment;
Maslach, 1998), reduced work commitment and performance (Abel and Sewell, 1999;
Kokkinos, 2007), absenteeism, and may contribute to the decision to leave the
profession ( Jepson and Forrest, 2006; Kyriacou, 2001). Moreover, teachers’ job stress
has been shown to directly, and negatively, influence job satisfaction (e.g. Chaplain,
1995; De Nobile and McCormick, 2006; Greenglass and Burke, 2003). Liu and Ramsey
(2008), for instance, found that stress resulting from poor work conditions (inadequate
time for planning and preparation and a heavy teaching load) had the strongest
influence on teachers’ job satisfaction. High stress levels, however, are not an inevitable
consequence of challenging conditions. Teachers with higher self-efficacy report
greater resilience in the face of challenging teaching conditions than those with lower
self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977, 1995).
Modest but persistent gender differences in job stress have generally been found
(e.g. Antoniou et al., 2006; Chaplain, 2008; Greenglass and Burke, 2003), with female
teachers reporting greater stress than male teachers, possibly due to higher overall
workloads and greater conflict between work and family roles (Greenglass and Burke,
2003). However, some studies have failed to find gender-based differences in perceived
stress (e.g. Jepson and Forrest, 2006).
Based on Bandura’s (1995) social cognitive theory, teacher self-efficacy has been
conceptualised as “the extent to which the teacher believes he or she has the capacity
to affect student performance” (Bergman et al., 1977, p. 137). Teachers’ self-efficacy has
been identified as an important source of motivation and commitment (Trentham et al.,
1985; Tschannen-Moran and Hoy, 2001), as well as a strong predictor of effectiveness.
Teachers with higher self-efficacy have lower absenteeism (McDonald and Siegall,
1993) and are less likely to leave the profession (Burley et al., 1991; Glickman and
Tamashiro, 1982) than those with lower self-efficacy. Teachers with lower self-efficacy
experience higher levels of job stress and greater difficulties in teaching (Betoret, 2006;
Klassen and Chiu, 2010). Teaching self-efficacy has also been found to relate to job
satisfaction (Caprara et al., 2003; Chen et al., 2004; Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2007), with Determinants of
teachers more likely to be satisfied with their work when they feel confident in job satisfaction
performing their major work-related tasks or attaining their work-related goals
(e.g. Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2007; Vaezi and Fallah, 2011). Furthermore, enhancing
teacher’s self-efficacy and self-esteem has a positive influence of diminishing stress
(Vaezi and Fallah, 2011).
Self-esteem is generally used to describe a person’s overall sense of self-worth 367
and can involve a variety of beliefs about the self (Myers, 2007). High self-esteem is
considered a fundamental aspect of personal wellbeing, happiness, and adjustment
(Brown, 1998; Diener, 2000). Individuals with higher self-esteem are more satisfied with
their lives, have fewer interpersonal problems, achieve at a higher and more consistent
level, and are less susceptible to psychological problems (e.g. anxiety and depression)
and physical illness (Brown, 1998) than those with lower self-esteem. Although several
studies have explored students’ self-esteem, few have investigated teacher self-esteem
(Lee and Hirschlein, 1994). However, previous research indicates that teachers with
higher self-esteem are likely to be happier and more effective in the classroom (Crane,
1974; Schultz and Hausafus, 1982/1994), more likely to evaluate themselves accurately
(Vukovich and Pfeiffer, 1980), and less stressed in their work (Schultz and Hausafus,
1982/1994) than teachers with lower self-esteem.
As highlighted above, the role of self-esteem in predicting teacher job satisfaction
has been neglected in the research literature, as have the factors contributing to
teachers’ job satisfaction in Ireland. Moreover, there is a lack of consistency in relation
to the relationship between demographic/teacher characteristics and job satisfaction.
As such, self-esteem was incorporated with self-efficacy, perceived stress, and teacher
characteristics to investigate the determinants of Irish primary school teachers’
job satisfaction.
The aims of this study were fourfold, namely, to examine: potential gender
differences in job satisfaction, self-efficacy, self-esteem, and perceived stress; the
relationship between self-efficacy, self-esteem, and job satisfaction; how perceived
stress relates to teachers’ self-efficacy, self-esteem and job satisfaction, and which of
the predictor variables (self-efficacy, self-esteem, perceived stress, age, highest level
of education, and years of teaching experience) best predicts job satisfaction.

Method
Given the findings of previous research, the following hypotheses were tested:

H1. There will be no significant difference between male and female teachers on job
satisfaction, self-efficacy, self-esteem, and perceived stress.

H2. There will be a positive relationship between self-efficacy, self-esteem, and

job satisfaction.

H3. Stress will negatively correlate with self-efficacy, self-esteem, and job
satisfaction.

H4. Self-efficacy, self-esteem, perceived stress, age, education, and years of teaching
will significantly contribute to understanding teachers’ job satisfaction with
self-efficacy as the strongest predictor of job satisfaction.
IJEM Participants
28,4 Participants were 121 primary school teachers (68 per cent response rate) from
eight Department of Education and Skills run primary schools in Dublin, Ireland.
The demographic characteristics of participants are presented in Table I.

Procedure
368 Participants completed paper-and-pencil questionnaires, which they were asked to
return to the lead researcher in a sealed envelope. Each participant was provided
with a brief description of the study, including an indication of completion time
(approximately 15 minutes). Participants were assured about the confidentiality
of their participation and informed that they could withdraw from the study at
any time. Ethical approval for this study was granted by Dublin Business School
Ethics Committee.

Measures
Fimian teacher stress inventory (FTSI; Fimian, 1984). The FTSI is a 49-item measure of
occupational stress, and assesses work-related stressors (e.g. time management, work-
related stressors, and professional distress), as well as the manifestations of
occupational stress (e.g. emotional, cardiovascular, and behavioural manifestations).
Participants rate the strength of each of item on a five-point Likert scale (1 ¼ strongly
disagree to 5 ¼ strongly agree). Cronbach’s a indicated good internal consistency
(a ¼ 0.91).
Teacher self-efficacy scale (Woolfolk and Hoy, 1990). Teacher self-efficacy scale was
employed to assess teachers’ confidence in performing their work-related tasks
and fulfilling work-related goals. Participants in our study responded to the 22-item
TSES (a ¼ 0.76), using a six-point scale (1 ¼ Strongly Disagree to 6 ¼ Strongly Agree),
with higher scores indicating higher self-efficacy. Sample questions include; “When

Variable Frequency %

Gender
Male 34 28.1
Female 87 71.9
Teaching experience (years)
1-5 35 28.9
6–10 32 26.4
11-20 13 10.7
21-30 24 19.8
31 þ 17 14.0
Age (years)
20-30 41 33.9
31-40 29 24.0
41-50 30 24.8
51-60 þ 21 17.4
Highest level of education
Diploma 17 14.0
BA, BSc 16 13.2
Hons BEd 60 49.6
Table I. Masters 27 22.3
Sample demographics Doctorate 1 0.8
a student does better than usual many times it is because I exert a little extra effort” Determinants of
and “When I try, I can get through to the most difficult students”. job satisfaction
Job Satisfaction Survey (Wellness Councils of America, 2004). Job Satisfaction
Survey was used to collect comprehensive information on the factors important to
employees when assessing overall job satisfaction. Participants were asked to respond
to 30 dichotomous (Yes ¼ 1 and No ¼ 0) items, with higher total scores reflecting
higher levels of job satisfaction. Good internal consistency was found in the present 369
study (a ¼ 0.85).
The Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSES; Rosenberg, 1965). RSES was used to assess
teachers’ global self-esteem. The RSES is a ten-item self-report scale that requires
participants to rate descriptive statements (e.g. “I take a positive attitude toward
myself”) on a four-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (“strongly agree”) to 4 (“strongly
disagree”). Scores can range from 10 to 40, with higher scores reflecting more positive
evaluations of the self. The measure demonstrated good internal consistency in the
present study (a ¼ 0.83).

Results
Descriptive statistics and group differences
Descriptive statistics including means (M) and standard deviations (SD) for all
variables are presented in Table II, together with group differences (between male
and female teachers) for perceived stress, self-efficacy, and self-esteem. Results
indicate that participants had high levels of self-esteem (M ¼ 32.30, SD ¼ 4.56),
moderate self-efficacy (M ¼ 67.18, SD ¼ 4.56), moderate perceived stress levels
(M ¼ 135.94, SD ¼ 23.20), and high job satisfaction (M ¼ 26.58, SD ¼ 4.23). The
Independent sample t-tests indicate no significant difference between male and female
teachers on any of the study variables, which is consistent with the H1.
Intercorrelations among self-esteem, self-efficacy, and job satisfaction were
investigated using Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients (Table III).
Results indicate a weak, negative relationships between self-esteem and self-efficacy
(r ¼ 0.22, po0.05) and a weak, positive relationship between self-esteem and job
satisfaction (r ¼ 0.23, po0.05). Self-efficacy and job satisfaction were not significantly
related. Partial support for the H2, which posited a positive relationship between
self-efficacy, self-esteem, and job satisfaction was, therefore, found.
The relationships between perceived stress and self-efficacy, self-esteem, and job
satisfaction were also investigated using Pearson product-moment correlation
coefficients (Table III). Results indicate a weak positive association between

Variable Gender n MEAN SD t-value p-value

Self-esteem Male 34 32.79 4.76 1.09 0.28

Female 87 31.80 4.36
Self-efficacy Male 34 67.44 11.39 0.25 0.80 Table II.
Female 87 66.91 9.94 Descriptive statistics and
Perceived stress Male 34 133.24 25.37 1.20 0.23 group differences for self-
Female 87 138.63 21.02 esteem self-efficacy,
Job satisfaction Male 34 26.91 4.62 0.82 0.42 perceived stress and job
Female 87 26.24 3.83 satisfaction
IJEM perceived stress and self-efficacy (r ¼ 0.25, po0.01), a moderate negative association
28,4 between perceived stress and self-esteem (r ¼ 0.43, po0.01) and a moderate negative
relationship between perceived stress and job satisfaction (r ¼ 0.41, po0.01).
These results, therefore, partially support the H3, which predicted that perceived
stress will negatively correlate with self-efficacy, self-esteem, and job satisfaction.
Additionally, years of teaching experience was positively related to perceived stress
370 (r ¼ 0.28, po0.01) and negatively related to job satisfaction (r ¼ 0.28, po0.01); while
respondent age was positively related with perceived stress (r ¼ 0.23, po0.05) and
negatively related to job satisfaction (r ¼ 0.20, po0.05).
Multiple linear regression was performed to assesses the effect of the predictor
variables (self-efficacy, self-esteem, perceived stress, age, highest level of education,
years of teaching experience) on teachers’ job satisfaction. Preliminary analyses were
conducted to ensure no violation of the assumptions of normality, linearity,
and homoscedasticity.
Since no a priori hypothesis was made to determine the predictor entry order, a
direct method was used for the multiple linear regression analysis. The full model
explained 22 per cent of variance (R2 ¼ 0.17), (F(6, 114) ¼ 5.20, po0.01) in job
satisfaction. As shown in Table IV, out of the six predictors included in the model, only
perceived stress made a unique statistically significant contribution to the model
(b ¼ 0.35, po0.01). This indicates that teachers experiencing greater perceived
stress are significantly less satisfied in their jobs that those experiencing less perceived
stress, controlling for all other factors in the model. The H4, that self-efficacy is the
strongest predictor of job satisfaction was consequently unsupported.

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. Years of teaching experience 1

2. Age in years 0.86** 1
3. Highest level of education 0.16 0.13 1
4. Self-esteem 0.13 0.11 0.04 1
5. Self-efficacy 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.22* 1
Table III. 6. Perceived stress 0.28** 0.23* 0.06 0.43** 0.25** 1
Correlations between the 7. Job satisfaction 0.28** 0.20* 0.13 0.23* 0.04 0.41** 1
predictor variables and
teachers’ job satisfaction Notes: Statistical significance: * po0.05; ** po0.01

R2 Adj R2 b p-value

Model 0.22 0.17 0.01

Self-efficacy 0.07 0.41
Self-esteem 0.07 0.45
Table IV. Perceived stress 0.35 0.01
Standard multiple Age 0.13 0.43
regression model of Highest level of education (years) 0.07 0.40
predicting Irish primary Teaching experience (years) 0.27 0.11
school teachers’ job
satisfaction Note: n ¼ 121
Discussion Determinants of
Over the previous two decades, an extensive body of research has emerged on the job satisfaction
factors that may help to explain or predict teacher job satisfaction (e.g. Judge and
Church, 2000; Judge et al., 2002). However, limited research has examined teachers’ job
satisfaction in Ireland. Given the important influence of job satisfaction on teachers’
performance, commitment, and physical and mental wellbeing, the overall aim of the
present study was to examine the factors influencing job satisfaction among Irish 371
primary school teachers. To achieve this, we examined: potential gender differences in
job satisfaction, self-efficacy, self-esteem, and perceived stress; the relationship
between self-efficacy, self-esteem, and job satisfaction; how perceived stress correlates
with self-efficacy, self-esteem, and job satisfaction; and which of the predictor variables
best predicts job satisfaction.
In support of the H1, the results indicate no significant differences in job
satisfaction, self-efficacy, self-esteem, and perceived stress between male and female
primary school teachers. This is notable, as several studies have found that
female teachers self-report greater teaching efficacy (e.g. Evans and Tribble, 1986), are
more satisfied in their work (Ma and MacMillan, 1999; Michaelowa, 2002; Spear et al.,
2000), and experience greater occupational stress (e.g. Antoniou et al., 2006; Chaplain,
2008; Greenglass and Burke, 2003) than their male colleagues. While no significant
gender differences in these variables were found, the results indicate that participants
in this sample experience moderate stress, have high self-esteem and moderate
self-efficacy, and are highly satisfied in their jobs. This supports previous research
(e.g. Borg and Falzon, 1989) indicating that teachers with moderate to high levels of
job stress may still gain considerable satisfaction from their work.
Consistent with Pierce and Gardiner’s (2004) review of previous empirical studies,
which found that individuals’ self-esteem formed around work and organisational
experiences plays an important role in shaping job satisfaction, a small but significant
relationship (r ¼ 0.22) between self-esteem and job satisfaction was found.
Consequently, support for the H2, which posited that teachers with higher
self-esteem will be more satisfied in their work, was found. However, inconsistent
with previous research (e.g. Caprara et al., 2003; Chen et al., 2004), no significant
relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction was found. This suggests that
teachers who are more satisfied with their work are not necessarily more confident in
their own ability to complete work-related tasks and goals. As efficacy beliefs make an
important contribution to job satisfaction and are believed to be relatively stable
once formed, further research is needed to examine the factors which contribute
to efficacy judgements and how such judgments are formed (Woolfolk and Hoy,
1990). Somewhat surprisingly, a weak negative correlation (r ¼ 0.23) between
self-efficacy and self-esteem was found. This suggests that teachers in this sample
may believe that they can perform the behaviours necessary to produce a desired
outcome but, at the same time, feel quite negatively about themselves generally (Passer
and Smith, 2008).
Years of teaching experience was found to have a weak negative relationship with
job satisfaction. This suggests that as the number of years teaching increases, job
satisfaction decreases. Similarly, a weak negative association between age and
job satisfaction was found. Both of these findings are in accordance with previous
research (e.g. Perie and Baker, 1997; Poppleton and Riseborough, 1991), which found
that younger and less experienced teachers report higher levels of job satisfaction than
their older and more experienced counterparts. The higher level of job satisfaction
IJEM among less experienced teachers could be explained by the “honeymoon period”
28,4 theory. This suggests that teachers early on in their careers embrace the challenges
and opportunities that arise in teaching, and consequently experience greater job
satisfaction (Schmidt, 2007).
Results indicate a weak positive association (r ¼ 0.25) between perceived stress and
self-efficacy. This finding is unexpected and contradicts previous theoretical and
372 empirical literature, which suggests that individuals with greater self-efficacy
experience less stress in threatening or taxing situations, as a consequence of their
beliefs about their ability to cope (Alden, 1986; Bandura, 1977; Chaplain, 1995;
De Nobile and McCormick, 2010). Both Cadiz (1989) and Betoret (2006), for instance,
found that teachers with higher self-efficacy were less stressed and more motivated
and satisfied in their profession than those with lower self-efficacy. This result is
concerning as the combination of higher stress levels with lower perceived efficacy to
manage job demands may increase individuals’ vulnerability to burnout (Leiter, 1991).
It also suggests that occupational stress may negatively affect the beliefs that teachers
have about themselves (Beehr, 1995; Cherniss, 1980). A possible explanation for this
finding is that teachers reporting higher teaching self-efficacy have greater
expectations of themselves to perform effectively and successfully in their job roles.
Consequently, they may carry out extra functions beyond the expected typical ones,
set themselves higher goals, try out new teaching approaches, and put more time and
effort into teaching and the preparation of teaching materials (Guskey, 1988; Stein
and Wang, 1988). As a result, they may experience greater overall stress. Such an
interpretation is consistent with Biggs (1988), who explains that individuals in helping
professions are particularly prone to stress because of their idealistic goals.
As highlighted in the introduction, little research has examined the relationship
between perceived stress and self-esteem among teachers. The results of the present
study indicate a moderate negative (r ¼ 0.25) association between these two
variables. This is in line with previous research examining the relationship between
stress and self-esteem in undergraduate students (Abouserie, 1994), which showed that
students with higher self-esteem are less stressed than those with lower self-esteem.
This suggests that a reduction in teachers’ stress levels may be achieved by enhancing
their self-esteem.
The analysis revealed that the set of predictor variables accounted for 22 per cent of
job satisfaction variance. However, of the six predictors included in the regression
analysis, only perceived stress was found to explain unique predictive variance
(b ¼ 0.35). Consequently, the H4, that the strongest predictor of job satisfaction
would be self-efficacy, was not supported. This indicates that primary school teachers
experiencing higher perceived stress are less satisfied in their jobs than those
experiencing less stress. It also tentatively suggests that increased job stress may lead
to decreased job satisfaction, which was suggested in previous research (e.g. Borg and
Falzon, 1989). However, the present study does not prove causal directions; lower job
satisfaction may result in an increase in perceived stress (a reciprocal relationship
could also exist).
The non-significant relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction in the
regression is again somewhat surprising. This is because previous research has
generally found self-efficacy to be an important contributor to teachers’ job satisfaction
(e.g. Caprara et al., 2003). However, the lack of self-efficacy’s effect on job satisfaction is
in line with a previous study of teachers in Abu Dhabi (Badri et al., 2012), and suggests
that teachers with greater confidence in their ability to perform work-related tasks and
fulfil work-related goals may not be more satisfied with their work than those less Determinants of
confident in their own ability, when controlling for other variables. One possible job satisfaction
interpretation of this finding is that the measure of teaching self-efficacy used in the
present study was relatively broad, encompassing a variety of interpersonal and
organisational skills. It may be that the breadth of this measure obscured relationships
that might exist at a task-specific, rather than domain level. In line with this, it has
been argued (Bandura, 1977; Pajares, 1996) that more specific self-efficacy judgements 373
provide greater information about how self-efficacy influences behaviour than more
general judgements.
The findings must be interpreted in the context of several important limitations.
First, our sample was restricted to teachers in one area of Ireland, and although
a relatively large number of teachers responded to the survey, responses may not be
representative of other samples of teachers in different settings. Consequently,
replication of the study findings in more diverse samples and settings (e.g. different
school settings, such as private, inner city, rural, and single gender) would be
beneficial. Second, our study relied on retrospective self-report data, precluding
any conclusions from being drawn about the temporal relations among the variables
examined. It would, therefore, be valuable to use a prospective design to examine the
relations among these variables in future studies. In particular, such a design could
be used to examine the temporal ordering of teacher stress and job satisfaction, as well
as determine whether job satisfaction reciprocally affects some of this study’s
independent variables. Fourth, while the results of this study suggests that perceived
stress is the main predictor of job satisfaction, it unclear what the main sources of
stress are for teachers (e.g. demands, control, relationships, change, role, or support;
HSE, 2006). Finally, the present study examined only a limited range of constructs
that potentially influence teachers’ job satisfaction, and the job satisfaction variance
explained by these variables was modest. It is likely that job satisfaction is influenced
by constructs not examined in the present study, such as locus of control,
belongingness, social support, and coping.

Conclusions and recommendations

This study provides valuable information on the factors influencing Irish primary
school teachers’ job satisfaction, a population largely overlooked previously in
the literature. More specifically, this study highlights the important influence of
perceived stress on teachers’ job satisfaction. Importantly, perceived stress is likely
to be a modifiable variable that could be effectively targeted at an individual and/or
organisational level to improve teachers’ work satisfaction (i.e. stress management,
training, counselling, organisational restructuring, and job redesign). The results of
the present study also provide a clear and important direction for future research: the
qualitative exploration of the sources of teacher stress. A qualitative approach would
allow for the in-depth exploration of the situational factors contributing to perceived
stress, which could then be targeted by local educational authorities and school
decision makers.
As self-efficacy did not independently relate to job satisfaction, and given the
important consequences that stress has for biological and cognitive functioning, it is
recommended that school decision makers target perceived stress in their efforts to
improve teachers’ job satisfaction. Although a range of strategies for preventing
stress and promoting health and wellbeing in the workplace have been suggested in
the literature, evidence of their efficacy or effectiveness is lacking (Biron et al., 2012).
IJEM Currently, a multi-pronged approach, as suggested by Cooper and Cartwright (1994)
28,4 may be advisable for implementation in Irish primary schools. Specifically, Cartwright
and Cooper recommend the combined use of primary (e.g. stress reduction), secondary
(e.g. stress management), and tertiary (e.g. workplace counselling) techniques for
managing occupational stress. The use of professional development opportunities to
enhance teachers’ self-efficacy and, consequently, lower their job stress and increase
374 their job satisfaction should also be considered. Given the positive relationship
between self-efficacy and stress in the present study, helping teachers to set realistic
goals and make fair self-assessments may also be beneficial in reducing stress.
The present study offers new and important information on the factors influencing
Irish primary school teachers’ job satisfaction, and has clear implications for schools
and future research. Significant bivariate relationships between self-esteem, perceived
stress, and job satisfaction were found. Importantly, however, the multiple regression
analysis revealed that only one of these constructs, perceived stress, explained unique
variance in teachers’ job satisfaction while controlling for covariates. Accordingly, it is
recommended that school decision makers in Ireland focus their attention on perceived
stress in their efforts to improve teachers’ job satisfaction (and improve their overall
health and wellbeing), as efforts to increase teachers’ self-efficacy and self-esteem may
not directly increase their job satisfaction.

References
Abel, M.H. and Sewell, J. (1999), “Stress and burnout in rural and urban secondary school
teachers”, The Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 92 No. 5, pp. 287-293.
Abouserie, R. (1994), “Sources and levels of stress in relation to locus of control and self-esteem in
university students”, Educational Psychology, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 323-330.
Alden, L. (1986), “Self-efficacy and causal attributions for social feedback”, Journal of Research in
Personality, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 460-473.
Antoniou, A.S., Polychroni, F. and Vlachakis, A.N. (2006), “Gender and age differences in
occupational stress and professional burnout between primary and high-school teachers
in Greece”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 21 No. 7, pp. 682-690.
Badri, M.A., Mohaidat, J., Ferrandino, V. and El Mourad, T. (2012), “The social cognitive model
of job satisfaction among teachers: testing and validation”, International Journal of
Educational Research, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 12-24.
Bandura, A. (1977), “Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioural change”, Psychological
Review, Vol. 84 No. 2, pp. 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1995), Self-Efficacy in Changing Societies, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Beehr, T.A. (1995), Psychological Stress in the Workplace, Routledge, London.
Bergman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, M., Pauly, E. and Zellman, G. (1977), “Federal programs
supporting educational change”, Factors affecting implementation and continuation,
Vol. VII (ERIC Document Reproduction Service 140 432), RAND, Santa Monica, CA,
available at: www.rand.org/pubs/reports/R1589z7.html (accessed 10 April 2013).
Betoret, F.D. (2006), “Stressors, self-efficacy, coping resources and burnout among secondary
school teachers in Spain”, Educational Psychology, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 519-539.
Biggs, J. (1988), “Stress and the school management team”, Neon, Vol. 53, pp. 44-48.
Biron, C., Karanika-Murray, M. and Cooper, C. (Eds), (2012), Organizational Interventions,
Routledge, London.
Bishay, A. (1996), “Teacher motivation and job satisfaction: a study employing the experience
sampling method”, Journal of Undergraduate Sciences, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 147-155.
Borg, M.G. (1990), “Occupational stress in British educational settings: a review”, Educational Determinants of
Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 103-126.
job satisfaction
Borg, M.G. and Falzon, J.M. (1989), “Primary school teachers’ perception of pupils’ undesirable
behaviours”, Educational Studies, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 251-260.
Boyle, G.J., Borg, M.G., Falzon, J.M. and Baglioni, A.J. (1995), “A structural model of the
dimensions of teacher stress”, British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 65 No. 1,
pp. 49-67. 375
Brown, J.D. (1998), The Self, McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA.
Burley, W.W., Hall, B.W., Villeme, M.G., and Brockmeier, L.L. (1991), “A path analysis of the
mediating role of efficacy in first-year teachers’ experiences, reactions, and plans”, In
annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Cadiz, S. (1989), “The continuum of teacher training: a developmental approach to teacher
preparation”, Educational Research Journal, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 645-673.
Caprara, G.V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L. and Steca, P. (2003), “Efficacy beliefs as
determinants of teachers’ job satisfaction”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 95 No. 4,
p. 821.
Caprara, G.V., Barbaranelli, C., Steca, P. and Malone, P.S. (2006), “Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as
determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: a study at the school
level”, Journal of School Psychology, Vol. 44 No. 6, pp. 473-490.
Chaplain, R. (1995), “Stress and job satisfaction: a study of English primary school teachers”,
Educational Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 473-489.
Chaplain, R. (2008), “Stress and psychological distress among trainee secondary teachers in
England”, Educational Psychology, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 195-209.
Chen, G., Goddard, T.G. and Casper, W.J. (2004), “Examination of the relationships among general
and work-specific self-evaluations, work-related control beliefs, and job attitudes”, Applied
Psychology, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 349-370.
Cherniss, C. (1980), Professional Burnout in Human Service Organization, Praeger, New York, NY.
Cooper, C.L. and Cartwright, S. (1994), “Stress-management interventions in the workplace: stress
counselling and stress audits”, British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, Vol. 22 No. 1,
pp. 65-73.
Crane, C. (1974), “Attitudes towards acceptance of self and others and adjustment to teaching”,
British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 31-36.
Crossman, A. and Harris, P. (2006), “Job satisfaction of secondary school teachers”, Educational
Management Administration and Leadership, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 29-46.
Dabo, A. (1998), “The study of workers values and its implication to administration in the 21st
Century: a case study of college of education, Gidan Waya, Kafauchan”, Forum Academia,
Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 112-124.
De Nobile, J.J. and Mccormick, J. (2006), “Job satisfaction and occupational stress in Catholic
primary schools: implications for school leadership”, Leading and Managing, Vol. 13 No. 1,
pp. 31-41.
De Nobile, J.J. and McCormick, J. (2008), “Job satisfaction of Catholic primary school staff: a study
of biographical differences”, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 22
No. 2, pp. 135-150.
De Nobile, J.J. and McCormick, J. (2010), “Occupational stress of Catholic primary school staff:
a study of biographical differences”, International Journal of Educational Management,
Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 492-506.
Diener, E. (2000), “Subjective well-being: the science of happiness and a proposal for a national
index”, American Psychologist, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 34-43.
IJEM Evans, E.D. and Tribble, M. (1986), “Perceived teaching problems, self-efficacy, and commitment
to teaching among preservice teachers”, The Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 80 No. 2,
28,4 pp. 81-85.
Fimian, M.J. (1984), “The development of an instrument to measure occupational stress
in teachers: the teacher stress inventory”, Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 57 No. 4,
pp. 277-293.
376 Fritzsche, B.A. and Parrish, T.J. (2005), “Theories and research on job satisfaction”, in Brown, S.D.
and Lent, R.W. (Eds), Career Development and Counselling: Putting Theory and Research to
Work, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, pp. 180-202.
Glickman, C.D. and Tamashiro, R.T. (1982), “A comparison of first-year, fifth-year, and former
teachers on efficacy, ego development, and problem solving”, Psychology in the Schools, Vol.
19 No. 4, pp. 558-562.
Gosnell, S. (2000), “Determinant of career satisfaction among federal employees”, Paper
presented in Seminar on Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta,
Georgia.
Greenglass, E.R. and Burke, R.J. (2003), “Teacher stress”, in Dollard, M.F. and Winefield, A.H.
(Eds), Occupational Stress in the Service Professions, Taylor and Francis, New York, NY,
pp. 213-236.
Guskey, T.R. (1988), “Context variables that affect measures of teacher efficacy”, Journal of
Educational Research, Vol. 81 No. 1, pp. 41-47.
Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J.T. and Rapson, R.L. (1993), “Emotional contagion”, Current Directions in
Psychological Science, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 96-99.
HSE (2006), A Business Case for the Management Standards for Stress, HSE Books, London,
available at: www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr431.pdf
Ingersoll, R.M. (2001), “Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: an organizational analysis”,
American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 499-534.
Jepson, E. and Forrest, S. (2006), “Individual contributory factors in teacher stress: the role of
achievement striving and occupational commitment”, British Journal of Educational
Psychology, Vol. 76 No. 1, pp. 183-197.
Judge, T.A. and Church, A.H. (2000), “Job satisfaction: research and practice”, in Cooper, C.L. and
Locke, E.A. (Eds), Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Linking Theory with Practice,
Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 166-198.
Judge, T.A., Heller, D. and Mount, M.K. (2002), “Five-factor model of personality and
job satisfaction: a meta-analysis”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 3,
pp. 530-541.
Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Bono, J.E. and Patton, G.K. (2001), “The job satisfaction-job
performance relationship: a qualitative and quantitative review”, Psychological Bulletin,
Vol. 127 No. 3, pp. 376-407.
Klassen, R.M. and Chiu, M.M. (2010), “Effects on teachers’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction:
teacher gender, years of experience and job stress”, Journal of Educational Psychology,
Vol. 102 No. 3, pp. 741-756.
Klusmann, U., Kunter, M., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O. and Baumert, J. (2008), “Engagement and
emotional exhaustion in teachers: does the school context make a difference?”, Applied
Psychology, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 127-151.
Kokkinos, C.M. (2007), “Job stressors, personality and burnout in primary school teachers”,
British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 77 No. 1, pp. 229-243.
Kyriacou, C. (2001), “Teacher stress: direction for future research”, Educational Review, Vol. 53
No. 1, pp. 27-35.
Lee, C.L. and Hirschlein, B.M. (1994), “The relationship between home-economics teachers’ Determinants of
self-esteem and their classroom interaction”, Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences
Education, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 642-650. job satisfaction
Lee, R. and Wilbur, E.R. (1985), “Age, education, job tenure, salary, job characteristics, and job
satisfaction: a multivariate analysis”, Human Relations, Vol. 38 No. 8, pp. 781-791.
Leiter, M.P. (1991), “Coping patterns as predictors of burnout: the function of control and escapist
coping patterns”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 123-144. 377
Liu, S. and Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2012), “Chinese teachers’ work stress and their turnover
intention”, International Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 160-170.
Liu, X.S. and Ramsey, J. (2008), “Teachers’ job satisfaction: analyses of the teacher follow-up
survey in the United States for 2000–2001”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 24 No. 5,
pp. 1173-1184.
Locke, E.A. (1976), “The nature and causes of job satisfaction”, in Dunnette, M.D. (Ed.), Handbook
of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Rand McNally, Chicago, IL, pp. 1297-1349.
McDonald, T. and Siegall, M. (1993), “The effects of technological self-efficacy and job focus
and job performance, attitudes and withdrawal behaviours”, Journal of Psychology,
Vol. 126 No. 5, pp. 465-475.
Ma, X. and MacMillan, R.B. (1999), “Influences of workplace conditions on teachers’ job
satisfaction”, The Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 93 No. 1, pp. 39-47.
Maslach, C. (1998), “A multidimensional theory of burnout”, Theories of Organizational Stress,
pp. 68-85.
Mertler, C.A. (2002), “Job satisfaction and perception of motivation among middle and high
school teachers”, American Secondary Education, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 43-53.
Michaelowa, K. (2002), “Teacher job satisfaction, student achievement, and the cost of primary
education in francophone Sub-Saharan Africa”, Discussion Paper No. 188, HWWA.
Mwamwenda, T.S. (1997), “Marital status and teachers’ job satisfaction”, Psychological Reports,
Vol. 80 No. 2, pp. 521-522.
Myers, D. (2007), Psychology, 8th ed., Worth Publishers, New York, NY.
Pajares, F. (1996), “Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings”, Review of Educational Research,
Vol. 66 No. 4, pp. 543-578.
Passer, M. and Smith, R. (2008), The Science of Mind and Behaviour, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill,
New York, NY.
Perie, M. and Baker, D.P. (1997), “Job satisfaction among America’s teachers: effects of the
workplace conditions, background characteristics and teacher compensation”, National
Centre of Educational Statistics, available at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs97/97471.pdf
Pierce, J.L. and Gardiner, D.G. (2004), “Self-esteem within the work and organisational context:
a review of the organisation-based self-esteem literature”, Journal of Management, Vol. 30
No. 5, pp. 591-622.
Poppleton, P. and Riseborough, G. (1991), “A profession in transition: educational policy and
secondary school teaching in England in the 1980s”, Comparative Education Review,
Vol. 26 Nos 2-3, pp. 211-226.
Rosenberg, M. (1965), Society and the Adolescent Self-Image, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, NJ.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000), “Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being”, American Psychologist, Vol. 55 No. 1,
pp. 68-78.
Sargent, T. and Hannum, E. (2005), “Keeping teachers happy: job satisfaction among primary
school teachers in rural northwest China”, Comparative Education Review, Vol. 49 No. 2,
pp. 173-204.
IJEM Schmidt, S.W. (2007), “The relationship between satisfaction with workplace training and overall
job satisfaction”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 481-498.
28,4
Schultz, and Hausafus, (1982/1994), in Lee, C.L., and Hirschlein, B.M. (Eds), “The relationship
between home-economics teachers’ self-esteem and their classroom interaction”, Journal of
Family and Consumer Sciences Education, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 642-650.
Skaalvik, E.M. and Skaalvik, S. (2007), “Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy and relations with
378 strain factors, perceived collective teacher efficacy, and teacher burnout”, Journal of
Educational Psychology, Vol. 99 No. 3, pp. 611-625.
Skaalvik, E.M. and Skaalvik, S. (2009), “Does school context matter? Relations with teacher
burnout and job satisfaction”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 518-524.
Spear, M., Gould, K. and Lee, B. (2000), Who Would be a Teacher?: A Review of Factors Motivating
and Demotivating Prospective and Practising Teachers, NFER, Slough.
Stein, M.K. and Wang, M.C. (1988), “Teacher development and school improvement: the process
of teacher change”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 171-187.
Trentham, L., Silvern, S. and Brogdon, R. (1985), “Teacher efficacy and teacher competency
ratings”, Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 343-352.
Tschannen-Moran, M. and Hoy, A.W. (2001), “Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct”,
Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 17 No. 7, pp. 783-805.
Vaezi, S. and Fallah, N. (2011), “The relationship between self-efficacy and stress among Iranian
E.F.L. teachers”, Journal of Language Teaching and Resource, Vol. 2 No. 5, pp. 1168-1174.
Vukovich, D. and Pfeiffer, I. (1980), “Self concept and self evaluation: what is the relationship?”,
Action in Teacher Education, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 49-53.
Wellness Councils of America (2004), “Job satisfaction survey”, available at: www.welcoa.org
Woolfolk, A.E. and Hoy, W.K. (1990), “Prospective teachers’ sense of efficacy and beliefs about
control”, Journal of educational Psychology, Vol. 82 No. 1, pp. 81-91.

Further reading
Putter, L. (2003), Stress Factors Among Teachers in Schools of Industry, Unpublished masters
dissertation, Faculty of Education, Potchefstroom University for Christian, Higher Education.
Tabachnick, B. and Fidell, L. (2007), Using Multivariate Statistics, Pearson, London.

About the authors

Eithne Reilly is a Primary School Teacher and a Researcher in Educational Psychology at Dublin
Business School, Ireland.
Dr Katie Dhingra is a Researcher in Leadership and Management at the University of
Huddersfield, UK.
Dr Daniel Boduszek is a Lecturer in Criminal Psychology, at the University of Huddersfield,
UK. He is also the Editor-in-Chief of Journal of Criminal Psychology. Dr Daniel Boduszek is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: d.boduszek@hud.ac.uk

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints