Emotional self-efficacy and workplace psychological health in emergency dispatchers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The main purpose of this research is to establish the relationships between emotional self-efficacy and workplace psychological health for emergency dispatchers. Design/methodology/approach A correlational design was used to validate results of the study. Between December 2018 and February 2019, a secure online questionnaire was sent to dispatchers through four emergency call centers. Participation was voluntary. A total of 257 emergency dispatchers participated in this study. Gilbert et al. ’s (2011) scale of workplace psychological health and Deschênes et al. ’s (2019) scale of emotional self-efficacy were used. Multiple linear regression and Pearson's correlation tests were run using the SPSS 25 program in order to establish relationships between the two variables. Findings A total of three emotional competencies positively affect workplace psychological well-being (PWB), i.e. self-efficacy beliefs on managing one's own emotions, on managing other people' emotions and on using one's own emotions. As regards to psychological distress (PD), it is negatively correlated to self-efficacy beliefs on managing and using one's own emotions. Research limitations/implications One of the study's theoretical contributions is to broaden the scientific knowledge of emergency service dispatching, in addition to opening up a new field of study in workplace people management. Practical implications These scientific findings therefore show the importance of emotional self-efficacy in the workplace. The manager or the dispatch leader should focus on developing the following three emotional skills: self-efficacy in managing emotions, managing the emotions felt by others and using emotions. Training allowing the development of these emotional skills should be considered and would be beneficial for emergency dispatchers to maximize their well-being at work. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no other study has focused on emergency dispatchers and included the emotional self-efficacy and workplace mental health variables.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".