Job satisfaction and job-related stress among nurses: The moderating effect of mindfulness

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Job stress can positively influence individuals’ work motivation; however, it is more typical for job stress to have adverse physical and psychological effects, which in turn undermine job satisfaction.

OBJECTIVE:

The present study has two purposes: to evaluate the effect of the health-promotion lifestyle and job stress to job satisfaction and turnover intention, respectively; and to investigate the moderating effect of mindfulness on each relationship.

METHODS:

The present study surveyed 200 nurses employed at small-to-medium-sized hospitals in South Korea. To verify the internal consistency, the reliability of the scales that was administered with the Cronbach’s alpha. Correlations between mindfulness, health-promotion lifestyle, job satisfaction, stress factors, and turnover intention were analyzed. The moderating effect of mindfulness on the relationships among aforementioned measures were evaluated.

RESULTS:

We found significant associations between the health-promotion lifestyle and job satisfaction (p < 0.001), and mindfulness had a moderating effect on the relationship between the health-promotion lifestyle and job satisfaction (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS:

The enhancing effect of mindfulness in these relationships can suggest an important role of mindfulness in the relationship between life style and job attitude.

Keywords

Job stress health-promotion turnover intention lifestyle

1 Introduction

The primary duty of nurses is to provide nursing care to patients who have diverse needs. Nurses also collaborate with various staff members within their organization, including doctors, medical technicians, and administrators [1]. Not surprisingly, job-related stress among this group of healthcare professionals is high. Excessive stress ultimately causes physical and emotional exhaustion, as well as uncomfortable situations at work [2, 3]. Job stress may reflect excessive demands at work or a work environment where the individual is insufficiently equipped to handle a particular situation, the latter of which creates an imbalance between the individual’s abilities and demands that can be exacerbated by job stress [4, 5]. For instance, workers’ burnout that is accompanied with emotional exhaustion, decreasing sense of personal achievement, and increasing depersonalization can intensify with growing job stress [6 –8].

Depending on the specific subtype, job stress can positively influence individuals’ work motivation; however, it is more typical for job stress to have adverse physical and psychological effects, which in turn undermine job satisfaction [9, 10]. Prolonged exposure to these negative physical and psychological effects can even contribute to turnover intention [11]. Therefore, it is imperative to identify the factors influencing job stress among nurses and create an optimal work environment that can maximize their job satisfaction.

Various studies have been conducted to identify the factors influencing nurses’ job stress and job satisfaction [12 –14]. Job satisfaction and job stress not only affect the nurses themselves, but also affect their families, colleagues, and all other individuals connected to these professionals. Although hospital administrators and nursing researchers are presently pursuing structural, relational, administrative, and environmental changes to reduce stress experienced by nurses, addressing the root causes remains a challenging task. To reduce stress, it is critical to minimize burdens of external origins, while concomitantly increasing individuals’ capacity to cope so as to reduce the stress that comes from within—such as individuals’ negative prejudice and judgment. Taking this perspective, recent stress research focuses on mindfulness, which is the ability to cultivate equanimity. In fact, a study has already reported that mindfulness can reduce stress [15]. More broadly, mindfulness is awareness that arises through purposefully and non-judgmentally paying attention in the present moment, which requires curiosity, openness, and acceptance of the present moment [16, 17]. In the last 15 years, studies examining the stress-reduction effect of mindfulness in patients have been active [18]. More recently, the number of mindfulness studies involving health workers is on the rise [19].

Previous studies mostly focused on the direct effect of mindfulness training on stress reduction [20]. For instance, according to a meta-analysis based on 29 existing studies, mindfulness training targeting healthy individuals is sufficiently effective in reducing stress, depression, anxiety, and pain, which improved quality of life [21]. A recent Korean mindfulness study involving 50 nursing students reported that the group of students who received mindfulness training showed a notably greater reduction in depression, anxiety, and stress related to clinical performance, as well as a notably greater improvement in academic achievement and mindfulness compared to the group of students who did not receive the training [22]. Previous studies reported that 83.8% of Korean nurses experienced the job stress, and 70.1% of them showed turnover intentions [23, 24], and this high rate indicated the importance of studying the effect of mindfulness on reducing job stresses among Korean nurses, which has been understudied. Although a few recent studies have examined the regulatory or moderating effects of mindfulness [25 –28], the majority of studies have largely focused on examining the direct effect of mindfulness on stress reduction. Therefore, studies illuminating its additional effects (i.e., the role of mindfulness in the relationships between job satisfaction, stress factors, and outcome variables) are necessary.

The present study has two purposes: 1) to measure the effect of healthy lifestyle and job stress to job satisfaction and turnover intention, respectively; and 2) to measure the moderating effect of mindfulness on each relationship. Through the present study, the relationships between each positive/negative factor and criterion variables will be confirmed, and the role of mindfulness will be identified. This could be applicable to a broad range of workplaces that provide services.

2 Material and methods

2.1 Data collection and procedure

The present study surveyed nurses employed at small-to-medium-sized hospitals in Korea. To ensure the anonymity of data collected, cooperation of hospital health administrators was requested with the help of outside personnel. Subjects who expressed reluctance or hesitation in the course of the survey were excluded. The survey was conducted from March 2016 to May 2016, with a total of 255 nurses. Upon excluding incomplete responses, the data of 200 respondents were included in the data analysis. The survey questionnaire consisted of 130 questions, and each question took approximately five to seven seconds to answer. Participants took approximately 15 min to complete the whole survey, and each of the nurses who participated in the survey was compensated with $20.

2.2 Analysis

To verify the internal consistency reliability of the scales that were administered, Cronbach’s alpha was calculated using IBM SPSS Statistics, Version 24.0 [29]. To verify the appropriateness of the data collected, the subjects’ demographic characteristics were analyzed; to examine the approximate associations between the analysis variables, correlation analyses were performed.

To start, the main effect of healthy lifestyle on the nurses’ job satisfaction, and the main effect of stress on their turnover intention were analyzed with a hierarchical regression analysis. Subsequently, Preacher, Rucker, and Hayes’ PROCESS Mediation Model 1 [30] was used to examine whether mindfulness mediated each of the above main effects. A diagram depicting the results were presented in the style of Aiken and West [31], followed by verification of the slopes’ statistical significance at each level.

2.3 Measures

2.3.1 Mindfulness

To measure mindfulness, the Korean Five-Facet Mindfulness Scale [32] was used, which is Baer and colleagues’ Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire [33] validated in the Korean language. The scale consists of a total of 39 items distributed across the following subfactors: Acting with Awareness (7 items), Non-Judging of Experience (8 items), Observing (8 items), Non-Reactivity (8 items), and Describing (8 items). The scale’s overall internal consistency reliability was demonstrated with a Cronbach’s value alpha of 0.810. The value for each subfactor was 0.647 for the 7 items in Describing (upon elimination of one item with a low reliability); 0.906 for Acting with Awareness; 0.906 for Non-Judging of Experience; 0.867 for Observing; and 0.854 for Non-Reactivity.

2.3.2 Health-Promoting Lifestyle Profile

To measure health-promoting lifestyle, the Health-Promoting Lifestyle Profile (HPLP-II) [34] translated into the Korean language [35] was used. The scale consists of a total of 52 items distributed across the following subscales: health responsibility (9 items), physical activity (8 items), nutrition (9 items), spiritual growth (9 items), interpersonal relationship (9 items), and stress management (8 items). Each item was scored on a 4-point scale, which ranged from 1 = never to 4 = always, with a higher total score indicating a greater degree of health-promoting behavior. The scale’s overall internal consistency reliability was demonstrated with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.931. The value for each subscale was 0.633 for Health Responsibility; 0.899 for Physical Activity; 0.761 for Nutrition; 0.859 for Spiritual Growth; 0.698; for Interpersonal Relations; and 0.636 for Stress Management.

2.3.3 Job satisfaction and Stress factors

To measure job satisfaction, Slavit and colleagues’ scale [36], restructured by Lee and colleagues [37] was used. The scale contains a total of 9 items, each scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = not at all to 5 = very much so. It has a possible score ranging from 5–45 points, with a higher score indicating a greater degree of job satisfaction. Factor analysis categorized each item into the following 4 groups: Administration (2 items), Professional Status (2 items), Interpersonal Relationship (2 items), and Compensations (2 items). The scale’s internal consistency reliability was demonstrated with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.779.

Job stress was measured with the Korean Occupational Stress Score-Short Form (KOSS-SF), which is a standardized and simplified version of the scale developed by Chang and colleagues [38]. The scale consists of 24 items across the following 7 subscales: Job Demands (4 items), Lack of Job Autonomy (4 items), Interpersonal Conflicts (3 items), Job Insecurity (2 items), Organizational Structure (4 items), Inadequate Compensation (3 items), and Workplace Culture (4 items). Each item is scored on a 4-point scale. Items for which a higher score indicates greater job stress had the usual 1-2-3-4 points, and the 15 items for which a higher score indicates a lower level of stress were reverse-scored with 4-3-2-1 points. The scale’s internal consistency reliability was demonstrated with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.946.

2.3.4 Turnover intention

Turnover intention was measured with the 3 items developed by Hellgren, Sjoberg, and Sverke [39], the internal consistency reliability of which was demonstrated with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.833.

3 Results

3.1 Demographic characteristics

The demographic characteristics of the nurses in this study are shown in Table 1. All respondents were women, and the number of single nurses was 148 (74.0%). There were 137 nurses who had graduated from college (68.5%). For the employment period of the current job, 53 nurses (68.5%) had been employed in their current job for less than 1 year and 79 nurses (39.5%) had been employed for a total of less than 3 years. There were 122 nurses (61.0%) who worked in a ward part and 131 nurses (65.5%) who worked an eight-hour shift. The majority of the respondents (n = 160) were general nurses (80.0%).

Table 1
Demographic characteristics of subjects

Variable N (%) Variable N (%)

Gender female 200 (100.0) Part Ward 122 (61.0)

male 0 (0.0) Pediatric intensive 14 (7.0)

nonresponse 0 (0.0) Emergency 15 (7.5)

Marriage single 148 (74.0) Operation 35 (17.5)

married 52 (26.0) Outpatient clinic 14 (7.0)

Education college 137 (68.5) None response 0 (0.0)

university 59 (29.5) Shift Non Shift (day) 63 (31.5)

graduate school 4 (2.0) Double-shift 2 (1.0)

nonresponse 0 (0.0) Three-shift 131 (65.5)

Employment period (Current position) Under 1 year 53 (26.5) Non shift(night) 1 (0.5)

1∼2years (below) 54 (27.0) None response 3 (1.5)

2∼4 years (below) 30 (15.0) Position General 160 (80.0)

Over 4 year (below) 60 (30.0) General Manager 23 (11.5)

None response 3 (1.5) Chief 12 (6.0)

Employment period (Total) 3 year (below) 79 (39.5) Head 1 (0.5)

3∼5 years (below) 42 (21.0) None response 4 (2.0)

5∼8 years (below) 33 (16.5) Total 200 (100.0)

8 year (above) 43 (21.5)

None response 3 (1.5)

	Variable	N (%)	Variable	N (%)
Gender	female	200 (100.0)	Part	Ward	122 (61.0)
male	0 (0.0)	Pediatric intensive	14 (7.0)
nonresponse	0 (0.0)	Emergency	15 (7.5)
Marriage	single	148 (74.0)	Operation	35 (17.5)
married	52 (26.0)	Outpatient clinic	14 (7.0)
Education	college	137 (68.5)	None response	0 (0.0)
university	59 (29.5)	Shift	Non Shift (day)	63 (31.5)
graduate school	4 (2.0)	Double-shift	2 (1.0)
nonresponse	0 (0.0)	Three-shift	131 (65.5)
Employment period (Current position)	Under 1 year	53 (26.5)	Non shift(night)	1 (0.5)
1∼2years (below)	54 (27.0)	None response	3 (1.5)
2∼4 years (below)	30 (15.0)	Position	General	160 (80.0)
Over 4 year (below)	60 (30.0)	General Manager	23 (11.5)
None response	3 (1.5)	Chief	12 (6.0)
Employment period (Total)	3 year (below)	79 (39.5)	Head	1 (0.5)
3∼5 years (below)	42 (21.0)	None response	4 (2.0)
5∼8 years (below)	33 (16.5)		Total	200 (100.0)
8 year (above)	43 (21.5)
None response	3 (1.5)

3.2 Correlation among variables

Table 2 shows the correlations between mindfulness, health-promotion lifestyle, job satisfaction, stress factors, and turnover intention. By testing our first hypothesis, there was a significant relationship between health-promotion lifestyle and job satisfaction (r = 0.256, p < 0.001). For the relationship between sub-factors and job satisfaction, health responsibility (r = 0.193, p < 0.01), nutrition (r = 0.176, p < 0.05), spiritual growth (r =0.314, p < 0.001), interpersonal relations (r = 0.235, p < 0.001), and stress management (r = 0.215, p <0.01) were statistically significant except physical activity.

Table 2
Correlation between mindfulness, health-promotion lifestyle, job satisfaction, stress factors, and turnover intention tested in this study (N = 200)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1. Mindfulness

2. Acting with awareness 0.619^*

3. Non-judging experience 0.486^* 0.574^*

4. Observing 0.353^* –0.278^* –0.408^*

5. Nonreactivity 0.464^* –0.082 –0.249^* 0.460^*

6. Describing 0.570^* 0.218^** 0.156^* 0.133 0.126

7. Health-promotion lifestyle 0.298^* –0.062 –0.024 0.396^* 0.196^ 0.284^*

8. Health Responsibility 0.178^* –0.168^* –0.127 0.408^* 0.187^ 0.191^ 0.791^*

9. Physical Activity 0.032 –0.201^ –0.117 0.262^ 0.108 0.056 0.783^* 0.588^*

10. Nutrition 0.238^* –0.033 –0.033 0.358^* 0.208^ 0.096 0.767^* 0.559^* 0.547^*

11. Spiritual Growth 0.415^*** 0.148^* 0.094 0.290*^** 0.139^* 0.412^* 0.824^* 0.548^* 0.466^* 0.564^*

12. Interpersonal Relations 0.332^* 0.053 0.056 0.284^* 0.114 0.376^* 0.779^* 0.503^* 0.459^* 0.437^* 0.735^*

13. Stress Management 0.214^ –0.094 0.026 0.268^*** 0.173^* 0.197^ 0.805^* 0.566^* 0.651^* 0.526^* 0.599^* 0.546^***

14. Job satisfaction 0.151^* 0.158^* 0.000 0.121 –0.014 0.105 0.256^* 0.193^ 0.113 0.176^* 0.314^* 0.235^* 0.215^

15. Stress factors –0.053 –0.213^ –0.197^ 0.197^ 0.154^* –0.047 –0.129 –0.009 –0.094 –0.106 –0.118 –0.172^* –0.110 –0.308^*

16. Turnover intention –0.228^ –0.267^* –0.228^ 0.046 –0.031 –0.063 –0.066 0.014 0.050 –0.081 –0.108 –0.060 –0.142^* –0.340^* 0.230^

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16
1. Mindfulness
2. Acting with awareness	0.619^***
3. Non-judging experience	0.486^***	0.574^***
4. Observing	0.353^***	–0.278^***	–0.408^***
5. Nonreactivity	0.464^***	–0.082	–0.249^***	0.460^***
6. Describing	0.570^***	0.218^**	0.156^*	0.133	0.126
7. Health-promotion lifestyle	0.298^***	–0.062	–0.024	0.396^***	0.196^**	0.284^***
8. Health Responsibility	0.178^*	–0.168^*	–0.127	0.408^***	0.187^**	0.191^**	0.791^***
9. Physical Activity	0.032	–0.201^**	–0.117	0.262^**	0.108	0.056	0.783^***	0.588^***
10. Nutrition	0.238^***	–0.033	–0.033	0.358^***	0.208^**	0.096	0.767^***	0.559^***	0.547^***
11. Spiritual Growth	0.415^***	0.148^*	0.094	0.290^*	0.139^*	0.412^***	0.824^***	0.548^***	0.466^***	0.564^***
12. Interpersonal Relations	0.332^***	0.053	0.056	0.284^***	0.114	0.376^***	0.779^***	0.503^***	0.459^***	0.437^***	0.735^***
13. Stress Management	0.214^**	–0.094	0.026	0.268^***	0.173^*	0.197^**	0.805^***	0.566^***	0.651^***	0.526^***	0.599^***	0.546^***
14. Job satisfaction	0.151^*	0.158^*	0.000	0.121	–0.014	0.105	0.256^***	0.193^**	0.113	0.176^*	0.314^***	0.235^***	0.215^**
15. Stress factors	–0.053	–0.213^**	–0.197^**	0.197^**	0.154^*	–0.047	–0.129	–0.009	–0.094	–0.106	–0.118	–0.172^*	–0.110	–0.308^***
16. Turnover intention	–0.228^**	–0.267^***	–0.228^**	0.046	–0.031	–0.063	–0.066	0.014	0.050	–0.081	–0.108	–0.060	–0.142^*	–0.340^***	0.230^**

^*p < 0.05, ^**p < 0.01, ^***p < 0.001.

By testing our second hypothesis, there was a significant relationship between stressors and turnover intentions (r = 0.230, p < 0.01), while the relationship between mindfulness and job satisfaction was significant (r = 0.151, p < 0.05), the sub-factors were not significant except the acting with awareness (r = 0.158, p < 0.05). The turnover intention had a significant negative relationship with mindfulness (r = –0.228, p < 0.01), acting with awareness (r = –0.267, p < 0.001), and non-judging experience (r = –0.228, p < 0.001).

3.3 Moderating effect of mindfulness

Table 3 shows the results of the moderation effect of mindfulness on the effect of health-promotion lifestyle on job satisfaction. For the first step, the age, education, department, work experience, and job position were used as control variables. For the second step, the main effect of health-promotion lifestyle on job satisfaction was statistically significant (B = 0.277, p < 0.01). The health-promotion lifestyle significantly increased the job satisfaction. For the last step, interaction variables of health-promotion lifestyle and mindfulness predicted job satisfaction significantly (B = 0.550, p < 0.05). The health-promotion lifestyle with the high level of mindfulness resulted in the greatest job satisfaction (enhancing effect). Therefore, a moderation effect of mindfulness on the relationship between health-promotion lifestyle and job satisfaction was supported.

Table 3
Moderation effect of mindfulness on the relationship between health-promotion lifestyle and job satisfaction

Variable Dependent variable: Job satisfaction

Step1(B/SE) Step2(B/SE) Step3(B/SE)

Age –0.005 0.080 0.002 0.078 –0.009 0.077

Education –0.017 0.064 –0.052 0.063 –0.054 0.063

Part 0.059^ 0.022 0.056^ 0.021 0.055^* 0.021

Tenure –0.075^* 0.032 –0.071^* 0.031 –0.069^* 0.031

Position 0.028 0.087 0.038 0.084 0.048 0.084

Health-promotion 0.277^ 0.085 0.310^* 0.086

Mindfulness 0.110 0.131 0.064 0.132

Health-promotion×Mindfulness 0.550^* 0.272

F 2.684^* 4.137^* 4.188^*

R²(Δ R²) 0.066(0.066) 0.134(0.068^***) 0.153(0.019^*)

Variable	Dependent variable: Job satisfaction
Age	–0.005	0.080	0.002	0.078	–0.009	0.077
Education	–0.017	0.064	–0.052	0.063	–0.054	0.063
Part	0.059^**	0.022	0.056^**	0.021	0.055^*	0.021
Tenure	–0.075^*	0.032	–0.071^*	0.031	–0.069^*	0.031
Position	0.028	0.087	0.038	0.084	0.048	0.084
Health-promotion			0.277^**	0.085	0.310^***	0.086
Mindfulness			0.110	0.131	0.064	0.132
Health-promotion×Mindfulness					0.550^*	0.272
F	2.684^*	4.137^***	4.188^***
R²(Δ R²)	0.066(0.066)	0.134(0.068^***)	0.153(0.019^*)

^*p < 0.05, ^**p < 0.01, ^***p < 0.001.

Figure 1 shows the results of this study in the form of Aiken & West (1991) [30]. As a result of simple slope test at lower, middle, and high levels, the slope was not significant at the low level and increased significantly at middle and high level (middle t = 3.606, p < 0.001, high t = 3.727, p < 0.001).

Fig.1

Moderation effect of mindfulness on the relationship between health-promotion lifestyle and job satisfaction.

The effects of stressful factors on turnover intention are shown in (Table 4). In the first step, age, education, department, work experience and position in department were used as control variables. In the second step, the main effect of the stress factor and mindfulness on the turnover intention was significant (B = 0.248, p < 0.001), and the effect of the mindfulness was negatively significant (B = –0.540, p < 0.01). As a final step, the interaction variables of stressors and mindfulness significantly predicted turnover intention (B = 0.591, p < 0.05). Therefore, a moderation effect of mindfulness on the relationship between stressors and turnover intention was supported.

Table 4

Moderation effect of mindfulness on the relationship between stress factors and turnover intention

Variable	Dependent variable: Turnover intention
	Step1(B/SE)		Step2(B/SE)		Step3(B/SE)
Age	–0.257^*	0.123	–0.266^*	0.117	–0.285^*	0.116
Education	0.052	0.095	0.047	0.091	0.048	0.090
Part	–0.035	0.032	–0.017	0.031	–0.014	0.031
Tenure	0.113*	0.048	0.117^*	0.046	0.112^*	0.046
Position	–0.074	0.135	–0.068	0.128	–0.045	0.128
Stress factors			0.248^***	0.071	0.248^***	0.070
Mindfulness			–0.540^**	0.182	–0.533^**	0.181
Stress factors×Mindfulness					–0.591^*	0.289
F	3.041^*		5.555^***		5.468^***
R²(Δ R²)	0.077(0.077)		0.178(0.101^***)		0.197(0.019^*)

^*p < 0.05, ^**p < 0.01, ^***p < 0.001.

The results are shown in (Fig. 2) by the method of Aiken & West (1991) [27]. As a result of simple slope test at low, middle, and high levels, the slope at low and middle levels was significantly decreased (low t = 3.911, p < 0.001, middle t = 3.512, p < 0.001), but the slope was not significant at the high level. It indicated that a high level of mindfulness significantly reduced (buffering effect) the turnover intention of nurses who had high job stress.

Fig.2

Moderation effect of mindfulness on the relationship between stress factors and turnover intention.

4 Discussion

The purpose of this study was to examine the moderating effect of mindfulness on the relationship between health-promotion lifestyle and job stress on job satisfaction and turnover intention in 200 nurses working in small-to-medium-sized hospitals in Korea.

First, we found the relationship between health-promotion lifestyle and job satisfaction, which is the main effect of the moderating effect of mindfulness on the effects of health-promotion lifestyle on job satisfaction. This can be based on a cross-domain model between work and life as a result of confirming the effects of daily life style on work well-being as shown in previous studies [40 –42]. The enhancing effect of mindfulness in these relationships can suggest an important role of mindfulness in the relationship between life style and job attitude. In other words, nurse’s normal health-promotion lifestyle induces job satisfaction, and the higher the level of mindfulness, the more positive the relationship.

The effect of stress on turnover intention was found to be statistically significant [43, 44]. The buffering effect of mindfulness in this relationship means that the nurses with high level of mindfulness are less likely to increase the level of turnover intention due to the stress in the workplace than those who do not. In other words, the level of mindfulness can be seen as personal job resources. Personal job resources refer to a variety of physical, mental, psychological, and social aspects that play a functional role in achieving job objectives and reduce job demands by encouraging personal growth and development [45, 46]. Therefore, based on the job demand-resource model, when the stress of job demand is excessive causing a negative result such as job turnover, personal job resources mitigates it and copes with the cause of stress [47].

The limitations of this study are as follows. First, the sample of this study covers a limited range of occupations, and only women were targeted. The values or cultures of a particular country may affect the outcome of this study. In addition, the effects of the department and the employment period on the dependent variables were significant. However, as a result of the concentration of people in specific parts, there is a possibility that the relationship between demographic variables and stress and job satisfaction in the previous studies may not be properly reflected [48, 49]. Therefore, the follow-up study needs to examine the results through a variety of subjects including balance of gender.

Second, this study was conducted as a cross sectional study. The responses of all the respondents were measured and analyzed at one point, which has limitations in inducing accurate causal relationships. Follow-up studies are needed to investigate the relationship between health-promotion lifestyle-job satisfaction and stress-turnover intention, as well as the longitudinal study to investigate the precise process of the intervention point where the adjustment variable, mindfulness, is effective. In particular, mindfulness is a variable that can be changed through education or training, so it should be examined through various research designs such as field experiments.

Third, this study verified mindfulness as a moderating variable. In addition to mindfulness, which is a personal internal resource, it is necessary to consider external factors such as job satisfaction, job demands and work environment variables in previous studies related to job satisfaction and stress. In the follow-up study, it is necessary to carry out a comprehensive and integrated study by simultaneously verifying the effects of individual differences and environmental variables.

In conclusion, this study evaluated how the health-promotion lifestyle and job stress affected the job satisfaction and turnover intentions among Korean nurses, respectively. In addition, the moderating effect of mindfulness on each relationship was studied. The health-promotion lifestyle significantly increased job satisfaction. The high level of mindfulness has an enhancing effect between the health-promotion lifestyle and job satisfaction, and buffering effect between the job stress and turnover intention. These results indicate that mindfulness could have an important role of enhancing the occupational wellness of Korean nurses.

Conflict of interest

None to report.

References

Shiu

ATK

. The significance of sense of coherence for the perception of task characteristics and stress during interruptions amongst a sample of public health nurses in Hong Kong: Implications for nursing management. Public Health Nursing. 1998;15(4):273–80.

Chauhan

. Effect of job involvement on burnout,” The Indian Journal of Industrial Relations. 2009;44(3):441–53.

Lepine

, Podsakoff

, Lepine

. A meta-analytic test of the challenge stressor hindrance stressor framework: An Explanation of the inconsistent relationship among stressors and performance. Academy of Management Journal. 2005;48:764–73.

Jamal

. Job stress and job performance controversy: An Empirical assessment. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 1984;33:1–21.

Jamal

. Job stress and employee well-being: A Cross-Cultural empirical study. Stress Medicine. 1999;15:153–8.

Maslach

, Jackson

, Leiter

. MBI: The Maslach burnout inventory: Manual. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1996.

Hochwälder

. A longitudinal study of the relationship between empowerment and burnout among registered and assistant nurses. Work. 2008 Jan 1;30(4):343–52.

Sundin

, Hochwälder

, Lisspers

. A longitudinal examination of generic and occupational specific job demands, and work-related social support associated with burnout among nurses in Sweden. Work. 2011;38(4):389–400.

Bong

, So

, You

. A study on the relationship between job stress, self-efficacy and job satisfaction in nurses. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2009;15(3):425–33.

10.

LePine

, LePine

, Jackson

. Challenge and hindrance stress: Relationships with exhaustion, motivation to learn, and learning performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2004;89:883–91.

11.

Applebaum

, Fowler

, Fiedler

, Osinubi

, Robson

. The Impact of environmental factors on nursing stress, job satisfaction, and turnover intention. Journal of Nursing Administration. 2010;40:323–8.

12.

Healy

, McKay

. Nursing stress: The Effects of coping strategies and job satisfaction in a sample of Australian nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2000;31(3):681–8.

13.

Ernst

, Franco

, Messmer

, Gonzalez

. Nurses’ job satisfaction, stress, and recognition in a pediatric setting. Pediatric Nursing. 2004;30(3):219.

14.

Larrabee

, Janney

, Ostrow

, Withrow

, Hobbs

, Burant

. Predicting registered nurse job satisfaction and intent to leave. Journal of Nursing Administration. 2003;33(5):271–83.

15.

Cohen-Katz

, Wiley

, Capuano

, Baker

, Shapiro

. The Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction on nurse stress and burnout: A Quantitative and qualitative study. Holistic Nursing Practice. 2004;18:302–8.

16.

Kabat-Zinn

. Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice. 2003;10:144–56.

17.

Bishop

, Lau

, Shapiro

, Carlson

, Anderson

, Carmody

, et al. Mindfulness: An operational definition. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice. 2004;11:230–41.

18.

Baer

. Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A Conceptual and empirical review. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice. 2003;10:125–43.

19.

Mackenzie

, Poulin

, Seidman-Carlson

. A Brief mindfulness-based stress reduction intervention for nurses and nurse aides. Applied Nursing Research. 2006;19(2):105–9.

20.

Beddoe

, Murphy

. Does mindfulness decrease stress and foster empathy among nursing students? Journal of Nursing Education. 2004;43:305–12.

21.

Khoury

, Sharma

, Rush

, Fournier

. Mindfulness-based stress reduction for healthy individuals: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic Research. 2015;78(6):519–28.

22.

Song

, Lindquist

. Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction on depression, anxiety, stress and mindfulness in Korean nursing students. Nurse Education Today. 2015;35(1):86–90.

23.

Korea Biomedical Review (218.05, 15). Nurses rally to protest harsh working conditions. http://www.koreabiomed.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=2701.

24.

Korea Joongang Daily (2018.02, 23). Nurse, Gapjil culture shudder. http://news.joins.com/article/22390900.

25.

Chan

, Lam

. Mediator or moderator? The Role of mindfulness in the association between child behavior problems and parental stress. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 2017;70:1–10.

26.

Chen

, Wu

, Chang

. Gratitude and athletes’ life satisfaction: The Moderating role of mindfulness. Journal of Happiness Studies. 2017;18(4):1147–59.

27.

Daigneault

, Dion

, Hébert

, Bourgeois

. Mindfulness as mediator and moderator of post-traumatic symptomatology in adolescence following childhood sexual abuse or assault. Mindfulness. 2016;7(6):1306–15.

28.

Yang

, Mak

WWS

. The Differential moderating roles of self-compassion and mindfulness in self-stigma and well-being among people living with mental illness or HIV. Mindfulness. 2017;8(3):595–602.

29.

IBM SPSS Statistics 24 IBM Corp.

30.

Preacher

, Rucker

, Hayes

. Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2007;42:185–227.

31.

Aiken

, West

. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991.

32.

Won

, Kim

. Validation of Korean version of five-factor mindfulness questionnaire. The Korean Journal of Health Psychology. 2006;11(4):871–86.

33.

Bear

, Smith

, Hopkins

, Krietemeyer

, Toney

. Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment. 2006;13(1):27–45.

34.

Walker

, Hill-Polerrcky

. Psychometric evaluation of the life-style profile II. Unpublished manuscript, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 1996.

35.

Yeun

, Kim

, Jeon

. Factors influencing health promoting behavior among hospital registered nurses mood states, resourcefulness, and health perception. The Journal of Korean Nursing Administration Academic Society. 2011;17(2):198–208.

36.

Slavit

, Stamps

, Piedmont

, Hasse

. Nurses’ satisfaction with their work situation. Nursing Research. 1978;27:114–20.

37.

Lee

, Kim

, Son

, Han

. A Study of the degree of duty satisfaction according to the nurses’s characteristics. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2000;6(1):5–18.

38.

Chang

, Koh

, Kang

, Kim

, Kang

, Lee

, et al. Developing an occupational stress scale for Korean employees. The Korean Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2005;17(4):297–317.

39.

Hellgren

, Sjoberg

, Sverke

. Intention to quit: Effects of job satisfaction and job perception. In Avallone

, Arnold

, de Witte

, Editors. Feelings work in Europe (pp. 415–23). Milano: Guerini, 1997.

40.

Frone

, Russell

, Cooper

. Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict: Testing a model of the work-family interface. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1992;77(1):65–78.

41.

Lee

, Tsai

, Lee

. A Study on work stress, stress coping strategies and health promoting lifestyle among district hospital nurses in Taiwan. Journal of Occupational Health. 2011;53:377–83.

42.

Naçar

, Çetinkaya

, Baykan

, Zararsiz

, Yilmazel

, Sağiroğlu

. Health related lifestyle behaviors among students at a vocational education center in Turkey. Health. 2015;7:1536–44.

43.

Arshadi

, Damiri

. The Relationship of job stress with turnover intention and job performance: Moderating role of OBSE. Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2013;84:706–10.

44.

Mosadeghrad

. Occupational stress and turnover intention: Implications for nursing management. International Journal of Health Policy and Management. 2013;1(2):179–86.

45.

Bakker

, Demerouti

, Schaufeli

. The Cross-Over of burnout and work engagement among working couples. Human Relations. 2005;58:661–89.

46.

Demerouti

, Bakker

, Nachreiner

, Schaufeli

. The Job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2001;86(3):499–512.

47.

Bakker

, Demerouti

. The Job Demands-Resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 2007;22:309–28.

48.

McCarthy

VJC

, Power

, Greiner

. Perceived occupational stress in nurses working in Ireland. Occupational Medicine. 2010;60:604–10.

49.

Zaghloul

AAZ

, Enein

NYAE

. Nurse stress at two different organizational settings in Alexandria. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare. 2009;2:45–51.