Occupational Stress and Job Performance Among University Library Professionals of North-East India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective – The present study intends to investigate the occupational stress and job performance of university library professionals in North-East India. The main objective of the study is to assess the perceived level of occupational stress among library professionals and to identify any relationship between occupational stress and library professionals’ job performance. The study also aims to study gender differences regarding perceived occupational stress and job performance among library professionals as well as examine the influence of occupational stress on perceived job performance. Methods – Descriptive survey method was used for the study. The sample population consisted of 123 library professionals from different parts of North-East India selected through convenience sampling technique. The survey consisted of a structured questionnaire divided into three sections: demographic information, self-perceived occupational stress, and self-rated job performance. Descriptive and inferential statistical techniques including frequency, mean, standard deviation, t test, correlation co-efficient, and simple linear regression analysis were used to analyze data and interpret results with the help of the statistical package SPSS version 20. Results – The findings of the study established that a majority of library professionals working in university libraries of North-East India perceived a moderate level of occupational stress. It was also determined that male and female library professionals do not differ in their perception of occupational stress (p > 0.05), while a significant mean difference was found between male and female library professionals’ perceptions towards their job performance (p < 0.05). Males scored themselves higher than females in terms of eight indicators of job performance: quality of work performance, ability to handle multiple jobs, communication skills, decision making, problem solving, technical skills, ability to perform competently under pressure, and contribution to the overall development of the library. Regarding the relationship between occupational stress and job performance, the data indicated a significant negative relationship between occupational stress and job performance (r = -0.296, p < 0.01). In addition to this, intrinsic impoverishment, under participation, low status, and poor peer relationships were some of the factors negatively affecting the job performance of library professionals. Conclusion – The present study provides an insight about how occupational stress affects job performance of library professionals working in academic libraries. The findings revealed that there exists a modest but statistically significant negative relationship between occupational stress and job performance, which implies that an increment in the level of perceived occupational stress tends to influence library professionals’ self-perception of job performance negatively.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".