Role Stress and Affective Commitment: Mediator Analysis of Employee Satisfaction

Abstract

With an emerging competition and advance job requirements, the need to understand the role stress (RS) is becoming apparent. Literature indicates that RS negatively relates to employee attitudes, actions, and satisfaction and emotional commitment. However, it would be very interesting to understand the essential apparatus of role stress (RS)–affective commitment (AC) relationship. For this, the present research also studies the mediating role of employee satisfaction (ES). By using convenience sampling, the present research included 349 employees who work in the service sector of Punjab and Chandigarh. The results were analysed with the help of hierarchical multiple regression and bootstrapping in SPSS to study the intervening effect. The present study shows an empirical confirmation that there is a negative relationship between RS, AC and ES. Findings have also suggested the mediating influence of employee satisfaction in the relationship between RS and AC.

Keywords

Role Stress Affective Commitment Employee Satisfaction Mediator analysis Service Sector

Introduction

Affective commitment (AC) is most commonly studied topic in the area of organizational behaviour (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001). During the past two decades, AC has received substantial consideration which is apparent from the growing number of researches on the subject (Stazyk et al., 2011). Extensive literature review on AC reveals that researchers have primarily concentrated on (a) understanding the predictors of AC (Brammer et al., 2007; Ghaffaripour, 2015) and (b) underlining the positive consequences of AC for an organization (Chin et al., 2011; Christia et al., 2004; Ian et al., 2018). It is assumed that the aggregate AC displayed by employee influence organizational efficiency and effectiveness (Hellriegel & Slocum, 2007). Consequently, researchers, academicians and organizations continuously pursue new methods to increase employee AC.

In the current era, researchers have started to focus on discovering discouraging constructs influencing AC (Tiwari & Mishra, 2008). One such negative construct is RS—refers to an incapability to handle job pressure, as of a meagre fit between an employee’s abilities and job requirements and demands (Holmlund-Rytkönen & Strandvik, 2005). RS is frequently considered as a serious management concern; the association between RS and organizational outcomes is still not well discussed by researchers (Anand, 2011). Eman (2017) highlights that RS is a serious issue in all facet of a normal life as it withdrew the strength of an individual to handle repetitive issues and unexpected glitches.

Stress is frequently connected with an alarming factor in the environment, but now it is also being reconnoitred in the context of the interaction of an employee and work environment as it is an adaptive reaction to an external condition that impacts physical, mental and/or behavioural aberrations of the employees (Luthans, 2002). However, it, still unexplored by employers to understand the foundations of stress (Harshana, 2018), led to the emergence to study the RS, which has detrimental effects on employee attitudes and behaviours (Bhatti et al., 2011). Consequently, from an organizational framework, it still remains a contributory concept (Ahmed & Ramzan, 2013). Moreover, not much studies have concluded the impact of RS on an employee’s AC via employee satisfaction (ES; Irvan et al., 2013). While studying literature on the RS at the workplace, Henriette and Ebben (2016) have encouraged researches on the RS from an organizational perspective by focusing on cultural and diversity management. Henriette and Ebben (2016) also studied that the antecedents and consequents of RS vary from country to country. This connotation is also supported by Divya and Ganesh (2018). Hence, it would be remarkable to study the RS–AC association from an Indian context. Sharma and Devi (2011) discussed about RS from an Indian perspective as part of occupational stress. Though these studies are able to establish the significance of RS in the Indian framework, they have also demanded an enhancement of researches either in the form of discovering the mechanism by which RS negatively influences employee consequences or in the form of approving the achieved outcomes in diverse frameworks.

Although organizations are always in favour of conducting researches to reduce the unfavourable consequents, and besides that, researches particularly relating RS and AC in the Indian literature is limited (Glazer & Kruse, 2008). Exploring the relationship of RS with AC is noteworthy and significant, as a pertinent connotation of AC with organizational productivity (Hafiz, 2017). Understandings into the RS–AC relationship may also help organizations to understand how individuals endure their motivation levels to involve in AC even in the time of hardship.

Literature indicates a relationship between RS and AC, the results are varied (Haque & Yamoah, 2014; Hemdi, 2009; Syeda, Beenish, et al., 2017) and the intermediating apparatus through which RS is explained into AC remains uncertain. It is suggested that the ES may act as a mediator in RS–AC relationship because AC represents a strong emotional attachment of an individual with an organization, and the employee’s satisfaction with their organization affects his/her loyalty and desire to stay in an organization. The current research pursues to test and validate the relationship between RS and AC as well as examine the causal apparatus of RS and AC relationship through ES.

The present research is accompanied on the employees from the service sector as this sector embraces a significant place in the Indian economy. Though, the Indian service sector offers different encounters to its employees. The service sector is considered as one of the biggest establishment, but the challenges it offers—namely the workload, role issues, extended working hours and complicated work system—are not as worthwhile as the other sectors have (Mukherjee, 2013). The stereotype that the service sector focuses on consumer satisfaction and meeting their needs fulfilment make the sector even less attractive. Similarly, the service personnel are highly exposed to customer related issues and problems. To present extra-role behaviours while performing amongst such disrupting encounters, employees require the capacity to react efficiently and recuperate rapidly. The service sector was therefore chosen to conduct research.

Review of Literature and Hypotheses Development

Role Stress

The numerous types of ‘RS’ have broaden its importance to study (Pareek, 1983). Literature defines RS: (a) as a debilitating syndrome; (b) deals with the job; and (c) arises when employees experience undesirable effects in the job-related aspects in an organization (Bloisi et al., 2007; Pathak, 2012). Studies offer a strong indication that experiences of RS can result in deprived employee performance and organizational ineffectiveness (Gandham, 2000), as it is an inability to meet up the expectations which arise from a job (Pareek, 1983). House and Rizzo (1972) gave two main sources of RS: (a) role ambiguity refers to the non-appearance of required information which is mandatory for an individual to perform his job in an appropriate manner (Zhao & Rashid, 2010); and (b) role conflict consists instantaneous manifestation amongst two or more roles that makes the performance of the other more challenging (Katz & Kahn, 1970). Pareek (1983) asserted that the role ambiguity and role conflict are considered to be the main role stressors which may lead to unfavourable employee outcomes. This conceptualization is taken care of to study the RS in the current research study.

Literature indicates that the RS negatively influence ES (Mardhiah & Choi, 2015); organizational commitment (Anton, 2009); psychological well-being and motivation (Malik, 2011); productivity (Ross & Altmaier, 1994); occupational growth (Ethem et al., 2013); physical, psychological and emotional well-being (Sparks et al., 2001); burnout, irritation, depression and anxiety, group cohesiveness (Kumar, 2006); organizational support (Terry et al., 2003); turnover intentions (Zehra et al., 2018); and self-esteem (Barnett & Hyde, 2001).

Affective Commitment

The term organizational commitment has been quite extensively studied since the 1950s, which suggested three dimensions: affective, continuance and normative commitment (Allen & Meyer, 1990). AC means the emotional attachment of an employee with his/her organization, whereas continuance commitment includes an attachment of an employee with their organizations based on the importance associated with separation, and normative commitment exhibits the moral and ethical attachment of an employee with their organizations (Balassiano & Salles, 2012). AC is influenced by role-related factors, as compared to the continuance and normative commitment (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001; Ria et al., 2012). AC is considered to be a more reliable dimension of organizational commitment (Iverson & Buttigieg, 1999). These are the reasons for considering AC as an outcome variable for the present study.

Studies have extensively explored the antecedents of AC (Joiner & Bakalis, 2006; Waqas et al., 2018). Though, the mechanisms through which RS impacts AC remain vague. RS is much explored in organizational behaviour, but the study of its significance from an (Sirois, 2014; Sirois & Tosti, 2012) organizational context—the researches on RS (i.e., role ambiguity and role conflict), by and large—are neglected. Syeda, Marium, et al. (2017) showed a negative relationship between RS and AC, but their research did not exhibit the relationship of RS with AC in totality.

The current era is facing huge challenges in the form of high employee expectation, multifaceted consumer demands, massive competition and extraordinary consumer awareness. To cope up with these, it is very significant to decrease ambiguity and conflicts regarding their role, as having a comprehensive information relating to their job may make them feel to be valuable employees. Researchers also discuss that negative sentiments are connected to declining organizational outcomes (Christo & Pienaar, 2006). Thus, it is anticipated that RS at the workplace will disappoint employees to exhibit AC.

On the basis of the literature discussed above, researchers hypothesize:

H₁: RS relates negatively to AC.

Employee Satisfaction

Over the years, ES has been conceptualized as an attitude derived from the positive or negative aspects of the job (Aziri, 2011). Literature shows that RS is a task-related source of job stress (Vandenberghe et al., 2011) that makes employees more prone to face dysfunctional consequences and other challenging circumstances. This attitude may uphold the negative reactions which can negatively influence their emotional reaction towards the job. Yaacob and Long (2015) highlighted role conflict and role ambiguity as the foremost components of RS related to ES. Employees with RS are not able to discover purpose in what they do at their job. This implication at a job has been found to be a main foundation of deteriorated ES (Mardhiah & Choi, 2015). Katz and Kahn (1978) supported a negative relationship between RS (i.e., role ambiguity, role conflict) and performance and ES.

With this purpose, researchers hypothesize:

H₂: RS relates negatively to ES.

Employee Satisfaction and Affective Commitment

Literature supports that there is a positive relationship between ES and AC (Hakkak et al., 2014; Kaplan et al., 2013). It is discussed that satisfied employees are more probable to devote effort to achieve organizational goals and objectives. Mowday et al. (1979) assert that higher the degree of empathy with organizational goals and objectives, more the inclination to associate with an organization. Social exchange theory recommends that a sense of accountability is nurtured in employees who accept valued exchange content with their organization, and this results in mutuality with attitudes and behaviours of value to the employer (Patrick & Sonia, 2012). Khanam (2015) and Adekola (2012) discussed that ES is an important predictor of AC. When employees are emotionally attached to their organization, they are ready to exhibit their positive outlook on the various aspects of their working condition (Feryal & Sohail, 2013).

After studying the literature, researchers hypothesize:

H₃: ES relates positively to AC.

The Mediating Effect of Employee Satisfaction

The above literature discussed that there is an existence of a relationship between RS and AC, but, unfortunately, the mechanism through which RS impacts AC has not been studied. Apparently, the literature suggests that RS negatively influences ES (Kumar et al., 2015), and this tendency can decrease his/her inclination to display an emotional attachment with an organization (Mehmood et al., 2016). Nevertheless, it has become important to study whether ES would affect (mediate) the relationship between RS and AC. Omer et al. (2010), while investigating the mediating relationship between RS and AC, have suggested to explore the mediators in the indicated relationship in the service sector.

ES, an attitudinal intervening construct, has been studied by numerous scholars as a mediating variable that determines various outcomes connected to the behaviour and performance of employees (Iverson et al., 1996). In relation to AC as well, literature has explored ES as a mediator variable (Marcus et al., 2007). In the presence of contemporary literature supporting H₁–H₃ (which also function as the essential conditions for mediation), ES is considered as a mediator for the study. In the RS–AC relationship, it may be claimed that RS fosters employees to experience negative reactions (Afroze & Bhalla, 2018), which encourage them to create a feeling of detachment towards the organization (Christiana, 2012). This dispassion to the organization exercises less effort on behalf of the organization (like AC) willingly (Fairbrother & Warn, 2003). Hence, researchers proposed that RS leads to AC through ES and we propose the hypothesis:

H₄: ES will mediate the relationship between RS and AC.

The proposed relationship between RS, ES and AC is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Source: Author’s compilation.

Research Methodology

Participants and Procedure

This study involved 349 employees working in the service sector of Punjab and Chandigarh, India, out of the 400 distributed questionnaires, yielding a valid response rate of 87.25 per cent. Researchers collected data by using self-administered questionnaires with the help of convenient sampling. Out of total employees, 163 (46.7%) were male and 186 (53.3%) were female. The results show that 38 (10.9%) participants were below graduate, 45 per cent had post-graduation degree and 55 per cent had bachelor degree.

Measures

To measure the RS, a scale given by Rizzo et al. (1970) was used. It comprised 12 items (8 items for role conflict and 4 items for role ambiguity) measured on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree), where Cronbach alpha was reported to be 0.81. The sample statements in the scale were as follows: ‘I know what is expected of me’ and ‘I received clear explanations for what I have to do’. The model consisted 12 items with one latent AC factor exhibiting good fit with the existing data (v2 [6] = 8.85, GFI = 0.90, AGFI = 0.91, CFI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.05).

To measure AC, six-item scale given by Meyer and Allen (1997) and Meyer et al. (1993) were used. The Cronbach alpha of the scale was reported to be 0.85. The sample statements in the scale were as follows: ‘I feel as if this organization’s problems are my own problem’ and ‘I would be happy to spend the rest of my career in my present organization’. The model consisted 6 items with one latent AC factor exhibited good fit with the existing data (v2 [5] = 6.19, GFI=. 91, AGFI = 0.94; CFI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.04).

To measure ES, four-item scale prepared by Dubey et al. (1989) on a 5-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) was considered. The Cronbach alpha of the scale was reported to be 0.89. The sample statements in the scale were as follows: ‘Overall, I am satisfied with my job’ and ‘I am satisfied with all the facilities and opportunities are provided by my organization’. The model consisted six items and one latent AC factor which exhibited good fit with the data (v2 [6] = 6.42, GFI = 0.91, AGFI = 0.94, CFI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.05).

Analyses and Results

The analysis was done with the help of SPSS 22 version. The descriptive statistics, Cronbach’s alpha and bivariate correlation, are given in Table 1. To test H₁–H₃, hierarchical multiple regression analysis was conducted. Bootstrapping was conducted with the help of SPSS following Hayes’ (2013) steps to analyse the intervening influence of ES. Due to self-report instruments and cross-sectional research design of the research, common method bias can be the main issue. Though all the data was collected from the respondents at one point of time, but there may be chances of occurrence of common method variance bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003). However, in order to confirm that the present study is not affected by this issue, researchers conducted the Harman’s one factor test and studied the unrotated factor solution connecting all variables of attention (19 statements) through an exploratory factor analysis. The results indicated six factors and total variance explained for six factors was 39.18 per cent, 8.61 per cent, 7.62 per cent, 6.04 per cent, 5.03 per cent and 3.31 per cent, and the total of seven factors shows 68.38 per cent, suggesting that not any single factor was responsible for the major covariance in the criterion and predictor variable. So we can say that common method variance was not a problem in present research.

Test of the Proposed Model

A mediator variable transmits the influence of the predictor on the criterion, either in part or whole (MacKinnon, 2008), and in order to check the effect of ES as a mediator variable, researchers used a structural equation modelling (SEM) with maximum likelihood estimation (Wood et al., 2008; Table 1). For this, researchers considered two opposite models, where Model 1 includes ES, whereas Model 2 excludes ES to study the direct relationship between the RS and AC.

Table 1.

Test of Research Model

	Normed ϰ²	Goodness-of-Fit Index	Comparative Fit Index	Normed Fit Index	Relative Fit Index	Tucker– Lewis Index	Root Mean Square Error of Approximation	Akaike Information Criteria	Browne–Cudeck Criteria
Model 1	1.38	0.95	0.98	0.96	0.89	0.97	0.04	368.32	512.75
Model 2	3.71	0.81	0.79	0.79	0.72	0.79	0.10	587.54	729.86

Source: Author’s compilation.

Literature suggested that when GFI ≥ 0.90, it shows the well-fitting model (Byrne, 2001). Additionally, to make the comparison between Models 1 and 2, researchers computed the normed fit index (NFI), comparative fit index (CFI), relative fit index (RFI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), and the recommended fit values for CFI, NFI, TLI and RFI are ≥ 0.90 and RMSEA < 0.08 (Schumacker & Lomax, 2004). A model, which contains a high value of the proportionate fit indices, is considered to be the best-fitting model. Researchers used Akaike information criteria and Browne and Cudeck (1989) to support their results. Although it can be realistically objected, as the certainty of a causal model cannot be calculated by taking non-experimental data. There can be another causal model to fit the data correspondingly, but on the basis of theoretical evidences of the study, Model 1 can be considered to be the best-fitting model.

Descriptive Analysis

Descriptive analysis, reliability coefficients and inter-correlations among the variables are given in Table 2 which shows RS is correlated negatively and significantly with ES and AC at 0.01 and 0.05 significance levels. The measures of the study variables display good internal reliability. Correlation analysis showed that ES (r = –0.394, p < .01) and AC (r = –0.516, p < .01) correlated negatively with RS.

Table 2.

Descriptive Analysis, Alpha Reliabilities and Correlations for Variables

S. No.	Variable	M	SD	1	2	3
1	Role stress	45.28	5.91	(0.950)
2	Employee satisfaction	11.04	2.32	–0.394**	(0.874)
3	Affective commitment	15.89	3.05	–0.516**	0.075	(0.91)

Source: Author’s compilation.

Notes: N = 349. Coefficient alphas appear on the diagonal. **p < .01, two-tailed.

Hypotheses Testing

Researchers hypothesize that RS is negatively related to AC (H₁); RS is negatively related to ES (H₂); ES is positively related to AC (H₃); and ES mediates the relationship between RS and an employee’s AC (H₄). Literature shows that (Baron & Kenny, 1986), the fulfilment of the following conditions are mandatory to constitute the mediating impact: predicting and mediating variables are significantly associated; predictor and criterion variables must be significantly associated; mediator and criterion variables should be related significantly and the strength of the relationship between predictor and criterion variable must turn inconsequential or declines in the occurrence of intervening variable.

Regression analysis presented in Table 3 indicates that RS is significantly and negatively (b = –0.638, p < .01) connected to ES and AC (b = –0.862, p < .01). Consequently, H₁ and H₂ are accepted. Results fulfil the conditions, namely 1 and 2 of mediation. In Table 3, ES is significantly and positively (b = 0.894, p < .01) linked to AC, therefore it supports H₃, fulfil another condition of mediation. Table 3 also shows that subsequently ES was entered in the regression calculation, the association power of RS and AC get declining (b = –0.491**, p < .01), however endured significant. This study fulfils all requirements of mediating analysis, therefore it recommends the presence of partial mediation.

Table 3.

Hierarchical Regression Analysis Results

Variables and Statistics	ES	AC
Variables and Statistics	RS	ES	Step 1	Step 2
Role stress	–0.638**		–0.862**	–0.491**
Employee satisfaction		0.894**		0.582**
F	59.304**	346.67**	248.028**	1,141.12**
R ²	0.408	0.801	0.743	0.943
Adjusted R²	0.401	0.799	0.740	0.942

Source: Author’s compilation.

Notes: **p < 0.01; ES = employee satisfaction; AC = affective commitment; RS = role stress.

To authenticate the presence of partial mediation, researchers conducted bootstrapping by Hayes’ (2013) steps. Table 4 advocates that the indirect effect of ES is significant at 0.05 probability level. Therefore, H₄ is partially supported.

Table 4.

Bootstrapping Effects for the Indirect Effect of ES on RS–AC Relationship

Paths	Standardized Coefficient	Standard Error	Z	Confidence Level (Lower Level–Upper Level)	P
RS–ES	–0.250	0.017	3.22	–0.288 to –0.221	*
ES–AC	1.18	0.022	0.775	1.14 to 1.23	*
RS–AC (direct)	–0.445	0.011	2.14	–0.469 to –0.424	*

Source: Author’s compilation.

Notes: *p < 0.05; ES = employee satisfaction; AC = affective commitment; RS = role stress.

Discussion

This study examines the direct and indirect effects of ES on RS and AC among service sector employees of Chandigarh and Punjab. The presence of RS among the service sector employees may have serious outcomes, and these critical outcomes may adversely impact organizational performance. Hence, this notion strengthened the idea to study RS in the context of service sector (Malik et al., 2010). The results of this research on direct effects are in-line with the existing theoretical framework of RS (Mardhiah & Choi, 2015; Mittal & Bhakar, 2018; Sharma, 2007; Yaacob & Long, 2015). They show that service sector employees with higher levels of RS are less satisfied and less committed with their job as well as they are less likely to maintain their membership in an organization. Particularly, service sector employees with high RS consider their job meaningless and not able to exhibit a sense of accountability, responsibility and ownership towards his/her task. This suggests that this situation reduces the feeling of ES and emotional commitment with an organization. In addition, service sector employees with high satisfaction exhibit high emotional attachment with their organizations (Feryal & Sohail, 2013; Haldar & Chatterjee, 2019). This positive attitude of an employee would be beneficial for the organization to enhance its competitive advantage.

This study also examined that ES partially mediates the correlation between RS and AC, proposing that service sector employees with high level of RS are less satisfied with their job and hence less enthusiastic and keen to maintain their stay in an organization. RS directly and indirectly through ES effects AC (Malik et al., 2010; Yousef, 2002). To maintain a favourable perception regarding the role conflict and role ambiguity among the service sector employees would likely reduce their RS, in turn will lead to have constructive ES and AC (Mehmood et al., 2016).

Limitation

Similar to any other research, this study also has few drawbacks. The results suggest about the linkage between RS, ES and AC. The generalizability of the present results may not be recognized as this study relies mainly on cross-sectional data, where the major participants were female employees. Future research on a large sample size by taking different industries can be conducted to enhance generalizability of the results. Though the results favours about the acceptability of RS–ES–AC relationship, but causality among the variables was not investigated. In the future, an experimental study can be conducted to study the direction of causality. However, the understudy model can also be enriched by considering the demographic variables, age, gender, experience, education, experience, work hours and conditions, etc.

Theoretical Implications

This research provides substantial advancements for both RS and AC research. RS is very much explored with human psychology, whereas the majority of the researches have been done on treatment desiring population. The current research draws significant attention towards its implications in organizations, by enhancing the quality of prevailing literature. Further, in this study, RS has been considered as a complex phenomenon. Hence, the management of stress is not only a primitive responsibility of the organization, but employees should also involve to control the RS to perform well and to face day-to-day challenges.

Practical Implications

The significant relationship between RS, AC and ES helps the organizations to encourage and maintain constructive behaviours in an organization. The results show that RS plays an important role to predict an AC that suggests that measures to reduce RS should be incorporated during the recruitment and selection process to reduce role ambiguity and conflict. Organizational behavior research (Kupriyanov & Zhdanov, 2014) suggests that RS negatively impacts an employee’s performance. In the service sector, it has been observed that the nature of the job is monotonous and dull that creates feeling of boredom, depression and burnout among the employees. Making employees clear about their role in service organizations helps to control employee turnover and absenteeism.

An effective way to increase commitment and satisfaction among employees can be done by designing and formulating an appropriate work environment that provides clarity to the employees about their role. Omar et al. (2010) discussed that there is a need to discourage RS to manage organizational issues, that is, employee turnover. LaMontagne et al. (2007) have suggested ways to reduce RS through individual-level interventions and organizational-level interventions. Michie and Williams (2003) maintained that RS could be decreased through employee participation in decision-making, taking their suggestions and feedback, and by improving internal communication. RS can also be prevented through enhancing ES (Omar et al., 2010).

Conclusion

In the current environment, employees play an important role in all organizational effects. Consequently, there is a need to pay attention towards innovative measures to enhance organizational outcomes, that is, AC. RS is considered to be a critical situation amongst the employees as apparent in current research.

In fact, RS emerges as a negative contributor to both satisfaction and commitment level among the employees. This study discusses about the disapproving aspects of RS at the workplace and also emphasizes on the role of ES to enhance AC.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

References

Adekola

(2012). The impact of organizational commitment and job satisfaction: A study of employee at Nigerian universities. International Journal of Human Resources Studies, 2(2), 46–56.

Afroze

, & Bhalla

(2018). A study of organizational role stress and organizational commitment among the faculty members of public and private universities. International Journal of Human Resource Management and Research, 4(3), 69–76.

Ahmed

, & Ramzan

(2013). Effects of job stress on employees job performance: A study on banking sector of Pakistan. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 11(6), 61–68.

Allen

, & Meyer

(1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(1), 1–18.

Anand

(2011). A pilot study on influence of organizational role stress on perceived burnout among military aircrew. Indian Journal of Aerospace Medical, 55(2), 21–27.

Anton

(2009). The impact of role stress on workers’ behaviour through job satisfaction and organizational commitment. International Journal of Psychology, 44(3), 187–194.

Aziri

(2011). Job satisfaction: A literature review. Management Research and Practice, 3(4), 77–86.

Balassiano

, & Salles

(2012). Perceptions of equity and justice and their implications on affective organizational commitment: A confirmatory study in a teaching and research institute. Brazilian Administration Review, 9(3), 268–286.

Barnett

, & Hyde

(2001). Women, men, work, and family. American Psychologist, 56(10), 781–796.

10.

Baron

R. M.

, & Kenny

D. A.

(1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

11.

Bhatti

, Muhammad

, Shoukat

, & Faiz

(2011). Empirical analysis of job stress on job satisfaction among university. International Business Research, 4(3), 264–270.

12.

Bloisi

, Cook

, & Hunsaker

(2007). Management and organizational behavior (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

13.

Brammer

, Millington

, & Rayton

(2007). The contribution of corporate social responsibility to organizational commitment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(10), 1701–1719.

14.

Browne

, & Cudeck

(1989). Single sample cross-validation indices for covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 2(4), 445–455.

15.

Byrne

(2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

16.

Chin

, Anantharaman

, & Tong

(2011). The roles of emotional intelligence and spiritual intelligence at the workplace. Journal of Human Resources Management Research, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.5171/2011.582992

17.

Christia

, Kathleen

, & Florence

(2004). Affective commitment to the organization, supervisor, and work group: Antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64(1), 47–71.

18.

Christiana

(2012). Occupational stress and organizational commitment in Romanian public organizations. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 33, 1077–1081.

19.

Christo

, & Pienaar

(2006). South Africa correctional official occupational stress: The role of psychological strengths. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34(1), 73–84.

20.

Divya

, & Ganesh

(2018). Does diversity management practices influence organizational commitment among employees in India? https://www.amrita.edu/print/does-diversity-management-practices-influence-organizational-commitment-among-employees

21.

Dubey

, Uppal

, & Verma

S.K.

(1989). Further validation of a job satisfaction scale. Indian Psychological Review, 34.

22.

Eman

(2017). Effects of job rotation and role stress on job satisfaction and organizational commitment among large scale of administrative staff in nonprofit organizations (Unpublished thesis). The Islamic University, Gaza.

23.

Ethem

, Nurcan

, Ediz

, & Demet

(2013). The effect of role stress on the employee₹s well-being: A study in the pharmaceutical companies in the city of Izmir. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 84, 1361–1368.

24.

Fairbrother

, & Warn

(2003). Workplace dimensions, stress and job satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(1), 8–21.

25.

Feryal

, & Sohail

(2013). An empirical study of affective commitment across demographic groups in the banking sector of Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences, 7(3), 555–563.

26.

Gandham

(2000). Occupational stress: Time for a policy. The Health & Safety Practitioner, 18(1), 20–21.

27.

Ghaffaripour

(2015). Prediction of affective organizational commitment based on employee characteristics and psychological factors among oil personnel. International Journal of Management Business Research, 5(4), 337–350.

28.

Glazer

, & Kruze

(2008). The role of organizational commitment in occupational stress models. International Journal of Stress Management, 15(4), 329–344.

29.

Hafiz

(2017). Relationship between organizational commitment and employee’s performance evidence from banking sector of Lahore. Arabian Journal of Business And Management Review, 7(2), 1–7.

30.

Hakkak

, Gashti

, & Nawaser

(2014). The relationship between perceived organisational support & job satisfaction with organizational commitment. Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management Journal, 2(3), 194–202.

31.

Haldar

, & Chatterjee

(2019). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment of employees working in the hospitality industry of West Bengal. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, 8(3), 51–60.

32.

Haque

, & Yamoah

(2014). Gender employment longevity: I.T staff response to organizational support in Pakistan. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 4(12), 324–347.

33.

Harshana

(2018). Work related stress: A literature review. Annals of Social Sciences Management Studies, 2(3), 1–7.

34.

Hayes

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. The Guilford Press.

35.

Hellriegel

, & Slocum

(2007). Fundamentals of organizational behaviour. Thomson Learning.

36.

Hemdi

(2009). Investigating hotel employees’ organizational commitment: The influence of human resource management practices and perceived organizational support. Journal of Tourism, Hospitality & Culinary Arts, 1(3), 1–20.

37.

Henriette

, & Ebben

(2016). A cross-cultural comparison of the stress experienced by high-level career women. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 34(3), 17–21.

38.

Holmlund-Rytkönen

, & Strandvik

(2005). Stress in business relationships. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 20(1), 12–22.

39.

House

, & Rizzo

(1972). Role conflict and ambiguity as critical variables in a model of organizational behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 7, 467–505.

40.

Ian

, Paul

, Zoe

, & Russ

(2018). Affective commitment within the public sector: Antecedents and performance outcomes between ownership types. Public Management Review, 20(12), 1872–1895.

41.

Irvan

, Armanu

, Achmad

, & Noermijati

(2013). Organizational commitment as mediation variable influence of work motivation, leadership style and learning organization to the employees performance. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 7(2), 12–25.

42.

Iverson

, & Buttigieg

(1999). Affective, normative, and continuance commitment: Can the ‘right kind’ of commitment be managed? Journal of Management Studies, 36(3), 307.

43.

Iverson

, McLeod

, & Erwin

(1996). The role of employee commitment and trust in service relationships. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 14(3), 36–44.

44.

Joiner

, & Bakalis

(2006). The antecedents of organizational commitment: The case of Australian casual academics. International Journal of Education Management, 20(6), 439–542.

45.

Kaplan

, Emine

, Asli

, & Aksay

(2013). The relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment: The case of hospital employees. World Journal of Management, 4(1), 22–29.

46.

Katz

, & Kahn

R. L.

(1970). Social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). Atlas.

47.

Katz

, & Kahn

(1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

48.

Khanam

(2015). Organizational commitment of employees in relation to job involvement and job satisfaction. International Journal of Management and Social Science, 3(1), 12–34.

49.

Kumar

(2006). Sinhgad Business School―A study on job stress of nationalized and non-nationalized bank employees. Sinhgad Technical and Educational Society.

50.

Kumar

, Kaur

, & Dhillon

(2015). Organizational role stress and job satisfaction among nurses. Journal of Mental Health and Human Behavior, 20(2), 71–75.

51.

Kupriyanov

, & Zhdanov

(2014). The Eustress concept: Problems and outlooks. World Journal of Medical Sciences, 111(2), 179–185.

52.

LaMontagne

, Keegal

, Louie

, & Ostry

(2007). A systematic review of the job-stress intervention evaluation literature, 1990–2005. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, 13(3), 268–280.

53.

Luthans

(2002). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 695–706.

54.

MacKinnon

D. P.

(2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. Erlbaum.

55.

Malik

(2011). A study on occupational stress experienced by private and public banks employees in Quetta city. African Journal of Business Management, 5(8), 3063–3070.

56.

Malik

, Waheed

, & Malik

K.-U.-R.

(2010). The mediating effects of job satisfaction on role stressors and affective commitment. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(11), 223–235.

57.

Marcus

, Fernandes

, & Johnson

(2007). Infant rule learning facilitated by speech. Psychological Science, 18, 387–391.

58.

Mardhiah

, & Choi

(2015). Role of occupational stress on job satisfaction. Mediterranean Journal of Social Science, 6(2), 81–87.

59.

Mehmood

, Ungku

, Sobia

, & Muhannadm

(2016). Job satisfaction, affective commitment, and turnover intentions among front desk staff: Evidence from Pakistan. International Review of Management and Marketing, 6(S4), 305–309.

60.

Meyer

, & Allen

(1997). Commitment in the workplace. SAGE Publications.

61.

Meyer

, Allen

, & Smith

(1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 538–551.

62.

Meyer

, & Herscovitch

(2001). Commitment in the workplace. Toward a general model. Human Resource Management Review, 11, 299–326.

63.

Michie

, & Williams

(2003). Reducing work related psychological ill health and sickness absence: A systematic literature review. Occupational and environmental medicine, 60(1), 3–9.

64.

Mittal

, & Bhakar

(2018). Examining the impact of role overload on job stress, job satisfaction and job performance: A study among married working women in banking sector. International Journal of Management Studies, 5(2), 1–11.

65.

Mowday

, Steers

, & Porter

(1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224–247.

66.

Mukherjee

(2013). The service sector in India (Working Paper No. 352, pp. 1–29). Asian Development Bank.

67.

Omer

, Waheed

, & Malik

(2010). The mediating effects of job satisfaction on role stressors and affective commitment. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(11), 223–235.

68.

Pareek

(1983). Role stress scale: ORS scale booklet, answer sheet and manual. Naveen Publications.

69.

Pathak

(2012). Role of perceived organizational support on stress-satisfaction relationship: An empirical study. Asian Journal of Management Research, 3(1), 153–177.

70.

Patrick

, & Sonia

(2012). Job satisfaction & affective commitment. The IUP Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11(1), 1–36.

71.

Podsakoff

, MacKenzie

, Lee

, & Podsakoff

(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.

72.

Ria

, Siti

, & Muhlis

(2012). The influence of affective, continuance and normative commitments on the turnover intentions of nurses at Makassar’s private hospitals in Indonesia. African Journal of Business Management, 6(38), 10303–10311.

73.

Rizzo

, House

, & Lirtzman

(1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15(2), 150–163.

74.

Ross

, & Altmaier

(1994). Intervention in occupational stress. SAGE Publication.

75.

Schumacker

R. E.

, & Lomax

R. G.

(2004). A beginners guide to structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

76.

Sharma

, & Devi

(2011). Role stress among employees: An empirical study of commercial banks. Gurukul Business Review, 7, 53–61.

77.

Sharma

(2007). Indian model of executive burnout. Vikalpa, 32(2), 23–38.

78.

Sirois

(2014). Procrastination and stress: Exploring the role of self-compassion. Self and Identity, 13(2), 128–145.

79.

Sirois

, & Tosti

(2012). Lost in the moment? An investigation of procrastination, mindfulness, and well-being. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 5(2), 123–133.

80.

Sparks

, Faragher

, & Cooper

(2001). Well-being and occupational health in the 21st century workplace. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 489–510.

81.

Stazyk

, Panday

, & Wright

(2011). Understanding affective organizational commitment: The importance of institutional context. The American Review of Public Administration, 41, 603–624.

82.

Syeda

, Beenish

, Fakhr

, Syed

, Syeda

, & Marium

(2017). Measuring organizational commitment and occupational stress of Pakistani doctors: Comparing Lahore and Karachi public hospitals in gender perspective. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(2), 247–255.

83.

Syeda

, Marium

, & Beenish

(2017). A correlation between workplace stress and organizational commitment: Doctors response from public and private hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan. International Journal of Research in Business Management, 5(5), 41–52.

84.

Terry

, Suzanne

, & Sharon

(2003). The enigma of social support and occupational stress: Source congruence and gender role effects. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8(3), 220–231.

85.

Tiwari

, & Mishra

(2008). Work stress and health as predictors of organizational commitment. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 34(2), 267–277.

86.

Vandenberghe

, Panaccio

, Bentein

, Mignonac

, & Roussel

(2011). Assessing longitudinal change of and dynamic relationships among role stressors, job attitudes, turnover intention, and well-being in neophyte newcomers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(4), 652–671.

87.

Waqas

, Umair

, Farrukh

, & Mehnoor

(2018). Impact of transformation leadership on affective employee’s commitment. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, 7(1), 48–57.

88.

Wood

R. E.

, Goodman

J. S.

, Beckmann

, & Cook

(2008). Mediation testing in management research: A review and proposals. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2), 270–295.

89.

Yaacob

, & Long

(2015). Role of occupational stress on job satisfaction. Journal of Social Sciences, 2(1), 16–26.

90.

Yousef

(2002). Job satisfaction as a mediator of the relationship between role stressors and organizational commitment. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17(4), 250–266.

91.

Zehra

, Muhammad

, Qaiser

, & Rafaqet

(2018). The relationship between job stress and turnover intentions in the pesticide sector of Pakistan: An employee behavior perspective. Management Issues in Healthcare System, 4, 1–12.

92.

Zhao

, & Rashid

(2010). The mediating role of work-leisure conflict on job stress and retention of IT. Academy of Information and Management Sciences Journal, 13(2), 25–41.