Coping strategy for work-family conflict and burnout in construction industrial adult workers: A philosophical highlight

Background:

The work environment in Nigeria is demanding and could lead to psychological disturbances. Evidentially, construction workers have confirmed the horrible job stress and work-family conflict they experience in the workplace. This has led to work-related burnout. As a matter of importance, this study was conducted.

Methods:

A pure experimental design was used, which helped to randomly assigned recruited 98 construction industry adult workers to 2 arms (treatment and waitlisted control groups). Two dependent measures were distributed before, immediately after, and 4 weeks after completion of intervention with 12 sessions that were given to the treatment group.

Results:

This study found that cognitive behavior therapy is beneficial in the management of work-family conflict and work burnout among construction industry workers. Therefore, there is a need for advancement and adequate implementation of cognitive behavior therapy in industries for psychological functioning of workers.

1. Introduction

Work-to-family conflict arises when the demands of the work and family domains are incompatible, making it harder to fulfill 1’s obligations to one’s family as a result of one’s involvement in the other.^[1] Work-Family Conflict (WFC) happens when expectations from 1 position (often at home) interfere with a person’s ability to meet demands from another function in a different domain (typically at work).^[2] For instance, tasks like caring for elderly parents, young children, or members of the family with special needs, resolving family role conflicts with partners or spouses, maintaining social links, or even simple housekeeping chores commonly interfere with married women’s focus and performance at work.^[3] If left unresolved, these conflicts will seriously affect the employees’ ability to do their jobs well and maintain a happy home life.^[2]

Employees increasingly juggle both work and family responsibilities at once as a result of the dual-career household syndrome, forcing them to deal with work-related demands that limit their ability to fulfill their family obligations or job-related demands that limit their ability to fulfill their obligations to their families.^[2]

Conflicts between work and family life result from the incompatibility of the roles that are expected of family and the workplace.^[4] These conflicts have an adverse effect on job performance in the workplace because they are linked to outcomes like job discontent, job monotony, and low turnover rates. They are also linked to outcomes like psychological distress (such as depression) and marital dissatisfaction.^[2] According to Ajiboye,^[5] female employment in Nigeria has increased significantly in recent years, partly as a result of educational advancements. This suggests that the conventional single-income family is giving way to dual-income households. Role conflicts between husband and wife arise as a result of the new family structure’s requirement for different roles to be played within the setting of family and job.^[2] According to Ajala,^[6] dual-family workers encounter work-family conflict and have a poor work-life balance, which lowers job satisfaction, hinders job performance, and lowers quality of life. It has been highlighted that time spent working adds to the tension between employees work and family responsibilities.

Professional employees in Nigeria face the highest levels of work-to-family conflict, whilst nonprofessional employees suffer the highest levels of family-to-work conflict.^[7] Cultural norms in Nigeria, particularly in the south of the country, demand that women place a higher value on their home responsibilities than any other roles, including those at work.^[2] Some husbands have made their wives give up their paid jobs so that they can take care of the family. The inference is that any minor family-work conflicts may or will be settled in the family’s favor rather than the employer’s, which could be a sign of married women’s potential underperformance.

Besides the adverse effects on role implementation at home and efficient performance in the work setting, it increases the level of professional burnout, fatigue, and emotional pains in workers. According to a recent survey, a health technology business, over 2 to 3rd (64%) of Nigerian employees are at danger of employee burnout, a condition brought on by excessive and protracted stress.^[8] The dangers of burnout experienced by Nigerian workers, the condition could result in serious mental noncommunicable health problems.^[8] Employees in the Industrial and technical services sector may experience emotional weariness, depersonalization, and a diminished sense of personal accomplishment due to an imbalance between expectations and resources or rewards.^[9,10]

Job burnout has been a significant problem for the workforce of modern society.^[11] Excessive stress, insecurity, undervaluation, and alienation in the workplace can all trigger psychological problems among workers for whom job burnout may develop.^[11,12] Possibly, psychological problems are triggered due to illogical reasoning.

According to the conventional, prevalent view in Western philosophy, there is just 1 type of thinking – rational thinking – where individuals are logical and move from premises or assumptions to sound conclusions. If individuals do not follow this line of reasoning, they are acting illogically, irrationally, speculatively, creatively, or imitating other people’s ideas without taking into account the formal framework of real thinking. In order to assist humans draw conclusions from occasionally complex data sets, computers typically employ logical patterns in which functions follow 1 another in a linear sequence.

The labor-intensive construction industry employs about 220 million people globally, with nonnationals and migrant workers comprising a sizable portion of this workforce.^[13] In Nigeria, this tendency is very obvious. The majority of previous research on job burnout has focused on determining its causes and forecasting factors.^[14] Identifying and treating employees at risk of burnout is beneficial, not only to the well-being of the individual but also to the organization in terms of their return on investment due to improved productivity.^[8]

For those who are burnt out, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is a successful treatment.^[15,16] It can be offered as individual treatment, in groups, or in conjunction with other therapies. A common type of talking therapy is CBT. It is very regimented, in contrast to certain other therapies. You can anticipate setting some goals so you and your therapist both know what you are aiming for after talking things over so they fully comprehend your issue. You and your therapist will typically establish an agenda at the beginning of your session so that you both know what will be covered. It is preferable to choose a therapist who has knowledge of treating burnout. By applying CBT, a burnout out-patient will be evaluated by the therapist to keep an eye on the burnout symptoms the patient is experiencing, study the factors that contribute to stress and burnout and address potential lifestyle factors that may be involved (e.g., sleep difficulties, exercise, alcohol consumption). Through that, they will learn new skills connected to the workplace (e.g., communication skills, time management, or managing conflicts with others). The past studies have shown that CBT could enhance psychological functioning of people who are experiencing health and emotional problems.^[17–20] Given the positive outcomes of previous studies, we hypothesize that there will be no significant effect of CBT on work-family conflict amongst workers in treatment group compared to waitlist control group. There will be no significant effect of CBT on work burnout amongst workers in treatment group compared to waitlist control group. There will be no significant moderating influence of gender on work-family conflict and burnout amongst workers. No significant interaction effect of group and time regarding work-family conflict amongst workers. There will no significant interaction effect of group and gender with regards to burnout amongst workers.

2. Methods

2.1. Recruitment of participants

The researchers visited construction industries in Enugu state Nigeria for permission to conduct the study using their industrial and technical workers. Two weeks later, permission was granted. We orally sought the consent of the workers, and 98 workers accepted to participate in the study. Those that agreed to be part of the study were further screened using the dependent measures and inclusion and exclusion conditions. These included; Must be a staff of the construction industry; Readiness to participate in the study, and; Must have dysfunctional thoughts about self and the world of work. Those that did not meet the conditions were not included in the study. The adequacy of the number of participants was subjected to G power statistical tool and it showed that it was good to represent the population in the state.

Ethical approval to conduct this study was obtained from the Faculty of Vocational and Technical Education Research Committee, University of Nigeria, Nsukka. This was to comply with the research ethics as stated by American Psychiatric Association.

2.2. Measures

The Work-Family Conflict Questionnaire (WFCQ), a self-report survey created by Carlson et al,^[21] measures 6 aspects of work-family conflict: time-based WIF, time-based FIW, strain-based WIF, strain-based FIW, behavior-based WIF, and behavior-based FIW. Each of the 6 previously described dimensions of work-family conflict has 3 components in it. This self-report survey was used to gauge how much the work-family conflict was causing participants to have dysfunctional thoughts or actions. Within each of the 6 dimensions, the coefficient alpha was utilized to measure internal consistency. Time-based work interference with families is 0.87; time-based family interference with work is 0.79; strain-based work interference with families is 0.85; strain-based family interference with work is 0.87; and behavior-based work interference with families is 0.78; both are 0.85.^[21]

A 16-item scale called the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OBI), created by Demerouti et al^[22] was used to the participants burnout level. Disengagement (8 elements) and Exhaustion are the 2 dimensions of OBI (8 items). A 5-point Likert-type scale with a strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (4) range was used to grade the OBI (4). Responses marked “Strongly Agree” are given a score of 4, while those marked “Strongly Disagree” are given a score of 1. For items 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, and 12, this is the opposite. An overall OBI score can be calculated by combining the 2 subtotals. As the score climbs, the degree of burnout also rises. The OBI scores are not generally categorized by therapists as low, medium, or high. The reliability of OBI was reported by Reis et al^[23] and the present study had a reliability value of 0.78.

2.3. Intervention and implementation procedure

This study was a randomized control design. Through this, the participants were randomized into groups after undergoing the recruitment process and sample selection screening. Kindly see Figure 1. The eligibility of each worker was assessed to ascertain the baseline of burnout and work-family conflict. The 12 sessions that make up the manual were divided into 12 weeks of complete treatment and 2 weeks of follow-up. It was a once-weekly session that lasted an hour. Through a therapeutic alliance, the researchers made introductions to the participants and developed a connection with them as well as a code of conduct. This is done to get to know 1 another and the program’s rules. The participants were exposed to the concepts of work-family conflict and burnout between weeks 2 and 3 through the use of mood-monitoring tools. The purpose is to inform the participants about what they should know about the dependent conditions. It is explained to the participants between weeks 4 and 5 how work-family conflict influences their perspective of the burnout they were experiencing, wellness as well as its causes, manifestations, and symptoms. Biofeedback, relaxation, and exercise practice are the methods utilized to attain these. The purpose of this is to link work-family problems and burnout, and their consequences.

Figure 1.

Participants Consort diagram.

In the 6th week, it is examined how the illogical perception of work-family conflict causes physiological reactions, mental exhaustion, depression, and what elements related to work-family conflict affect the general well-being of adult workers in construction industries. This aims to identify stress related to work-family conflict and its concomitant impact on well-being. In week 7, participants were given an overview of cognitive behavior therapy and were taught how to use the cognitive disputation technique to resolve situations involving work-family conflict. The objective is to help the participants comprehend the significance, rationale, and objectives of the program. By the 8th week, teachers with work-family conflict have erroneous ideas, dysfunctional emotional responses, and negative attitudes that undermine their welfare.

Using cognitive disputation, behavioral exercises, problem-solving strategies, etc, the therapists handle work-family conflict among adult construction workers in weeks 9 and 10. They also deal with recognized dysfunctional beliefs and emotions that generate conflict with their wellness. Accepting what they cannot change is the goal. By the end of week 11, participants have received guidance on how to properly reflect on events in meditation so that difficult circumstances in life won’t appear overwhelming. The home exercise is amended and examined after a discussion on how to counter absolutism, erroneous conclusions, and worthlessness. The activities in week 12 focus on coping with and confronting issues related to work-family conflict. The sessions were ended soon after that.

2.4. Control condition

By the time individuals in the treatment group began their therapy, the participants in the control group had not yet begun theirs. Instead, after the trial was over, they were subjected to the identical CBT manual. In other words, they received 3 points (Time 1, Time 2, and Time 3). Due to the waitlisting and treatment of patients after their active participation in the treatment group, this procedure was necessary.

2.5. Therapists and treatment integrity check

The treatment integrity was evaluated by 2 raters. Two people from the research team served as these raters. They received training on both minor and significant therapy elements. The goal of this training is to guarantee that the best results are obtained. As agreed upon with the researchers, “spot checks” were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment. The goals of treatment integrity include how therapists develop, monitor, and evaluate treatment adherence as well as how self-report forms are recorded. This guarantees that the therapy was carried out as intended and that all requirements for treatment integrity have been met. Session integrity, component integrity, and overall integrity are some of these components.

2.6. Data analysis

Data collected from the pretest, posttest, and follow-up test were statistically analyzed using a multivariate test analysis of variance. The effect size of the intervention on the reduction of work-family conflict and burnout among construction adult workers with was reported using partial eta square and adjusted R2. The assumption of the Sphericity of the test statistic was tested using the Mauchly test of sphericity which was not significant. Thus, the variances of the differences between all combinations of the related measures are equal. The analysis was done using a statistical package for social sciences version 18.0.

3. Results

Of all the construction workers in intervention group, 30 (50.8%) were males and 18 (46.2%) were females; 13 (56.5%) were working in Municipal contruction industry, 14 (43.8%) in Water conservancy, 9 (50.0%) in Highway construction industry, 12 (48.0%) in hydropower construction project. Also, 19 (47.5%) had Low Income level, 22 (55.0%) had moderate income level, 7 (38.9%) had high income level; 10 (50.0%) had <8 working hour daily, 18 (52.9%) had between 8 and 10 working hour daily, 20 (45.5%) had >10 working hour daily; and 3 (27.3%) were single, 39 (55.7%) were married, and 6 (35.3%) were divorced. Workers in waitlisted control group, 29 (49.2%) were males and 21 (53.8%) were females; 10 (43.5%) were working in Municipal construction industry, 18 (56.3%) in Water conservancy, 9 (50.0%) in Highway construction industry, 13 (52.0%) in hydropower construction project. Also, 21 (52.5%) had Low Income level, 18 (45.0%) had moderate income level, 11 (61.1%) had high income level; 10 (50.0%) had <8 working hour daily, 16 (47.1%) had between 8 and 10 working hour daily, 24 (54.5%) had >10 working hour daily; and 8 (72.7%) were single, 31 (44.3%) were married, and 11 (64.7%) were divorced. Sociodemographic information of the participants shows that there is no significant difference in terms of participants' gender (χ² = 0.207, P = .649), construction industry (χ² = .891, P = .828), income level (χ² = 1.349, P = .510), daily working hour (χ² = 0.441, P = 802), and marital status (χ² = 4.619, P = .099). Kindly see Table 1.

Table 1.

Demographic Characteristics of the Participants.

Demographics	Categories	Treatment n/%	Waitlist control %	X2	P value
Gender	Male	30 (50.8%)	29 (49.2%)	.207	.649
	Female	18 (46.2%)	21 (53.8%)
Construction industry	Municipal project	13 (56.5%)	10 (43.5%)
	Water conservancy	14 (43.8%)	18 (56.3%)	.891	.828
	Highway project	9 (50.0%)	9 (50.0%)
	Hydropower project	12 (48.0%)	13 (52.0%)
Income Level	Low Income	19 (47.5%)	21 (52.5%)
	Moderate	22 (55.0%)	18 (45.0%)	1.349	.510
	High	7 (38.9%)	11 (61.1%)
Daily working hour	<8 h	10 (50.0%)	10 (50.0%)
	Between 8 and 10 h	18 (52.9%)	16 (47.1%)	.441	.802
	>10 h	20 (45.5%)	24 (54.5%)
Marital status	Single	3 (27.3%)	8 (72.7%)
	Married	39 (55.7%)	31 (44.3%)	4.619	.099
	Divorced	6 (35.3%)	11 (64.7%)

X² = Chi-Square, p = probability value.

Table 2 reveals the main effect due to intervention for the participants in the treatment group compared to the waitlisted control group over the 3 periods indicating that before the treatment, there was no significant difference between the treatment and control groups in initial work-family conflict score among construction workers, F [(1, 94) = .665, P = .417, Partial Eta Square (effect size) (${\eta }_p^2$) =0.007, ∆R² = 0.013]. At the posttreatment level, the CBI improves the management of work-family conflict score among construction workers, F (1, 94) = 3.561, P = 062, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.037, ∆R² = 0.045. After the posttreatment, a follow-up result show that effectiveness of CBI on work-family conflict was maintained F (1, 94) = 8.080, P = .005, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0079, ∆R² = 0.053.

Table 2.

Multivariate analysis results for main effects, moderating effect, and interaction effects according to WFCQ.

Source	Dependent variable	Type III sum of squares	df	Mean square	F	Sig.	Partial eta squared
Groups	Time 1	19.327	1, 94	19.327	.665	.417	.007
	Time 2	99.547	1, 94	99.547	3.561	.062	.037
	Time 3	97.319	1, 94	97.319	8.080	.005	.079
Gender	Time 1	43.927	1, 94	43.927	1.511	.222	.016
	Time 2	43.160	1, 94	43.160	1.544	.217	.016
	Time 3	3.427	1, 94	3.427	.285	.595	.003
Groups Gender	Time 1	80.014	1, 94	80.014	2.753	.100	.028
	Time 2	34.507	1, 94	34.507	1.234	.269	.013
	Time 3	.282	1, 94	.282	.023	.879	.000

df = degree of freedom, Sig. = significance, WFCQ = work-family conflict questionnaire.

In terms of moderating influence of gender, before the treatment, after the posttreatment, and follow-up levels Table 2 reveals that there was no significant difference among construction workers’ gender, moderating work-family conflict management, F (1,94) = 1.511, P = .222, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.016; F (1,94) = 1.544, P = .217, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.016; and F (1,94) = .285, P = .595, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.003, respectively.

Concerning the interaction effect of groups and gender at the posttreatment and follow-up levels, Table 2 reveals that there was no significant interaction effect of group and gender with regard to work-family conflict, F (1, 97) = 1.234, P = .269, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.013; and F (1, 97) = 0.023, P = .879, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.000, respectively.

Table 3 reveals the main effect due to intervention for the participants in the treatment group compared to the waitlisted control group over the 3 periods indicate that before the treatment, there was no significant difference between the treatment and control groups in the initial work burnout scores among construction workers, F ([1, 97] = .659, P = .419, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.007, ∆R² = 0.013). At the posttreatment the effect of CBI was significant in improving the management of work burnout score among construction workers, F (1, 97) = 100.620, P < .001, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.517, ∆R² = −0.006. After the posttreatment, a follow-up result show that F (1, 97) = 255.369, P < .001, ${\eta }_p^2$ =.731, ∆R² = 0.514.

Table 3.

Multivariate analysis results for main effects, moderating effect, and interaction effects according to OBI.

Source	Dependent variable	Type III sum of squares	df	Mean square	F	Sig.	Partial eta squared
Groups	Time 1	1.872	1	1.872	.659	.419	.007
	Time 2	451.305	1	451.305	100.620	<.001	.517
	Time 3	844.668	1	844.668	255.369	<.001	.731
Gender	Time 1	1.477	1	1.477	.520	.473	.006
	Time 2	.049	1	.049	.011	.917	.000
	Time 3	.214	1	.214	.065	.800	.001
Groups Gender	Time 1	2.420	1	2.420	.852	.358	.009
	Time 2	.014	1	.014	.003	.955	.000
	Time 3	.015	1	.015	.005	.947	.000

df = degree of freedom, OBI = oldenburg burnout inventory, Sig. = significance.

In terms of moderating influence of gender, before the treatment, after the posttreatment, and follow-up levels Table 2 reveals that there was no significant difference among construction workers gender, moderating work burnout management, F (1, 97) = .520, P = .473, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.006; F (1, 97) = .011, P = .917, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.001; and F (1, 97) = .065, P = .800, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.001, respectively.

Concerning the interaction effect of groups and gender at the posttreatment and follow-up levels, Table 2 reveals that there was no significant interaction effect of group and gender with regard to work burnout, F (1, 97) = .003, P = .955, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.000; and F (1, 97) = 0.005, P = .947, ${\eta }_p^2$ =0.000, respectively.

Given the sphericity assumption was violated based on Mauchly’s test [x²(2) = 23.468, P < .001, ε = .822], we employed the Greenhouse-Geisser to interpret the research data and the study results on Time. The results in Table 4 also suggest a statistically significant effect of time on the work-family conflict among construction workers as measured by WFCQ, F (1.502) = 930.522, P < .01, η²_P = .908. The results also indicate that work-family conflict among construction workers scores was not influenced significantly by group and time interaction effect, F (1.502) = 3.458, P = .047, η²_P = .035. The results also indicate that work-family conflict among construction workers scores was not influenced significantly by Time, group, and gender interaction effect, F (1.502) = 1.183, P = .299, η²_P = .012.

Table 4.

A repeated ANOVA results for time, and interaction effects as measured by WFCQ and OBI.

Source	Measure	Type III Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Time	WFCQ	36772.802	1.502	24475.929	930.522	<.001	.908
Time Groups	WFCQ	136.665	1.502	90.964	3.458	.047	.035
Time Groups Gender	WFCQ	46.753	1.502	31.119	1.183	.299	.012
Time	OBI	407.727	1.458	279.706	166.300	<.001	.639
Time Groups	OBI	407.727	1.458	279.706	166.300	<.001	.639
Time Groups Gender	OBI	1.645	1.458	1.128	.671	.468	.007

Df = Degree freedom, OBI = ldenburg burnout inventory, p = probability value, ${\eta }_p^2$ = Partial Eta Square (effect size), Sig. = significance, WFCQ = work-family conflict questionnaire.

On the other hand, the results suggest a statistically significant effect of time on work burnout among construction workers as measured by OBI, F (1.458) = 166.300, P < .01, η²_P = .639. The results also indicate that work burnout among construction workers scores was influenced significantly by group and time interaction effect as measured by OBI, F (1.458) = 166.300, P < .01, η²_P = .639. The results also indicate that work burnout among construction workers scores was not influenced significantly by Time, group, and gender interaction effect as measured by OBI, F (1.458) = 0.671, P = .468, η²_P = .007. Figures 2–5 further demonstrated the directions of the interaction effects as measured by the WFCQ and OBI.

Figure 2.

Interaction effect of group and time as measured by WFCQ. WFCQ = work-family conflict questionnaire.

Figure 5.

Interaction effect of group and time as measured by OBI. OBI = oldenburg burnout inventory.

Figure 3.

Interaction effect of group and gender as measured by WFCQ. WFCQ = work-family conflict questionnaire.

Figure 4.

Interaction effect of group and gender as measured by OBI. OBI = oldenburg burnout inventory.

Sidak post hoc analysis in Table 5 for Group × Time interaction effects shows that at Time 1, construction workers in the CBI intervention group had significantly similar OBI scores with the control group (Mean difference = −.283, standard error = .348, P = .419, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −.975,.409). On the contrary, construction workers in the CBI intervention group had significantly improved the OBI scores at Time 2 when compared to the control group (Mean difference = −4.392, standard error = .438, P < .01, 95%CI: −5.262, −3.523). Additionally, at Time 3 the construction workers in the CBI intervention group still show significantly higher OBI scores than those in the control group (Mean difference = −6.009, standard error = .376, P = .01, 95% CI: −6.756, −5.262).

Table 5.

Post hoc analyses for the OBI scores based on group × time interaction effects.

Time	(I) Groups	(J) Groups	Mean Difference (I-J)	Std. Error	Sig. †	95% CI
1	Treattment	Control	−.283	.348	.419	−.975,.409
	Control	Treattment	.283	.348	.419	−.409,.409
2	Treattment	Control	−4.392*	.438	<.001	−5.262, −3.523
	Control	Treattment	4.392*	.438	<.001	3.523, 5.262
3	Treattment	Control	−6.009*	.376	.000	−6.756, −5.262
	Control	Treattment	6.009*	.376	.000	5.262, 6.756

Based on estimated marginal means.

OBI = oldenburg burnout inventory, CI = confidence interval, Sig. = significance.

^*.The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

^†.Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Sidak.

4. Discussion

The results showed that there is no significant difference in terms of participants Sociodemographic characteristics (gender, construction industry, income level, daily working hour, and marital status). The result showed that effect of CBI was significant in improving the management of work-family conflict scores among construction workers. A follow-up result showed that the effectiveness of CBI on work-family conflict was maintained. In terms of the moderating influence of gender, it was revealed that there was no significant difference among construction workers gender, moderating work-family conflict management. For the interaction effect of groups and gender at the posttreatment and follow-up levels, there was no significant interaction effect of group and gender with regard to work-family conflict. The results also suggest a statistically significant effect of time on the work-family conflict among construction workers. The results also indicate that work-family conflict among construction workers’ scores was not influenced significantly by group and time interaction effect. The results also indicate that work-family conflict among construction workers scores was not influenced significantly by Time, group, and gender interaction effect.

An earlier study showed that throughout the course of the 3 intervention stages, stress symptoms and illogical beliefs brought on by work-family conflict considerably diminished.^[24] During the 3 intervention stages, the 4 irrational belief components – self-deprecation, authoritarianism, demand for justice, and low frustration tolerance – declined.^[24] The study’s findings supported the hypothesized effect of CBI on stress and conflict among teachers experiencing work-family conflict and engaging in problematic behaviors that jeopardize their welfare.^[24] The results also showed that early stress and conflict among teachers did not differ significantly between the treatment and no-contact control groups.^[24] Previous research has demonstrated a substantial relationship between stress and the behavior and well-being issues that instructors with work-family conflict experience.^[25–30] This demonstrates how the strategies enable the teachers to develop and acquire tools for managing the emotional responses brought on by work-family conflict. The findings also showed a significant relationship between time and therapy on the ability of teachers with work-family conflicts who display dysfunctional behaviors to effectively reduce stress.^[24] However, Abrams and Ellis^[31] proposed that stress reactions are rooted in beliefs that are absolute and rigid regarding aims and interests. These results support earlier research that showed CBI can successfully manage stress by recognizing and changing teachers’ illogical beliefs.^[32,33] It is hardly surprising that this treatment has had a substantial positive impact on instructors. This is so that the instructors physical, mental, and emotional health as well as their general well-being can be affected if the stress is not controlled.^[24]

The findings also point to a statistically significant time effect on managing work-family conflict and occupational stress in administrators.^[34] The findings also show that group and temporal interaction effects had a substantial impact on administrators coping mechanisms for work-family conflict and occupational stress.^[34] The results also show that time, group, and gender interaction effects had a substantial impact on the occupational stress and work-family conflict scores of administrators. This suggests that individuals exposed to the experimental group experienced less occupational stress than individuals in the control group.^[34]

In terms of work burnout, CBI was significant in improving the management of work burnout scores among construction workers. The follow-up result showed that a significant impact was sustained. It was also revealed that there was no significant difference among construction workers gender, moderating work burnout management. It was revealed that there was no significant interaction effect of group and gender with regard to work burnout. the results suggest a statistically significant effect of time on work burnout among construction workers. The results also indicate that work burnout among construction workers scores was influenced significantly by group and time interaction effect. The results also indicate that work burnout among construction workers scores was not influenced significantly by Time, group, and gender interaction effect as measured by OBI.

In view of the research demonstrating that CBI is highly successful in lowering occupational burnout and psychological distress over the course of the follow-up period, the current finding is consistent with this.^[35,36] The body of studies proving the effectiveness of CBI as a treatment for lowering burnout and discomfort at work has been bolstered by this study.^[37] Previous studies on both clinical and nonclinical populations have provided evidence for the effectiveness of CBI in improving people’s overall well-being from a variety of cultures and orientations.^[38–40] A prior study found that a drop in parents’ irrational beliefs may be the cause of couples fatigue.^[41] This is also in line with Azkhosh and Askard^[42] that discovered a strong connection between illogical beliefs and exhaustion. There is a significant association between the 2 psychological categories, which validates past studies that found illogical beliefs lead to the development of burnout.^[43] A couple may behave dysfunctionally and eventually experience marital burnout if their views are negatively warped.^[44] In the same study, Koolaee et al^[45] discovered a link between the irrational beliefs of female parents and burnout.

Additionally, the results of the group and gender interaction effect show that there is no significant interaction between group and gender with regard to burnout at the posttest and follow-up test levels.^[46] This demonstrates that gender has no bearing on CBI’s capacity to lessen fatigue. That is to say, the observable change or progress for which CBI holds participants accountable has nothing to do with their gender.^[46]

Given the conflicting situations in workplaces and families, workers are called to seek the truth and understand the reality of work demands for the management of work-family conflicts as asserted by 2 moral philosophers: John Locke, and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. The Lockean Inquiring System, named after John Locke, and the Hegelian Inquiring System, named after Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, are 2 philosophical inquiring systems that are particularly pertinent to conflict management.^[47] These 2 approaches to determining the veracity, legitimacy, solution, etc of any contention, position, or dispute represent very distinct approaches.^[47] According to the Lockean system, any question should be answered based on what the majority of people believe to be true. In fact, the Lockeans believe that if a majority of people agree on something, it must be true! Public opinion polls, for instance, that show what the majority of people think end up serving as the de facto standard for determining what is best and right for everyone. In stark contrast, the Hegelian philosophy maintains that it is only possible to establish whether 2 opposing viewpoints are true, right, or proper after they have been thoroughly argued in order to reveal their underlying assumptions.

4.1. Practical implications for construction workers

Given the positive outcomes of the treatment, the implication is that cognitive behavior therapists should strengthen their efforts in advancing the implementation of CBT philosophies. Otherwise, the health of the construction worker may deteriorate to bad condition. The workers cannot be active in their work when they are not feeling fine. Therefore, construction industries in Nigeria should employ CBT professionals who will monitor the psychological states of the workers. This could involve exploring how CBI could be integrated into workplace wellness programs to improve workers well-being and reduce work-family conflict and burnout.

Doing this could help to achieve good production both at home and at work. Construction workers should ensure that employees are well-safeguarded and that their emotional stability is balanced. When it comes to employees, there should not be a division between the home and the workplace.^[5] Conflicts from 1 domain can spread to the other. difficulties at work can quickly turn into family difficulties. Therefore, in order to promote healthy employees and good job performance, industrial social workers need have a solid understanding of both domains as they relate to employees.

5. Limitations

Despite the strength of the study, there are notable methodological flaws. One of the flaws is that there was no measure of distorted thoughts. Secondly, the sample size is relatively small compared to the population size of the construction industries in Nigeria. Thirdly, the participants in control group were not treated considering that it was their right to receive the treatment. Fourthly, the recruitment strategy was limited to 1 state in Nigeria, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other regions in the country. Additionally, the use of oral consent may have introduced bias, as participants may have felt compelled to agree to participate in the study. The use of a waitlist control group may introduce bias, as participants may feel disappointed or discouraged by not receiving immediate treatment. There is also a potential for contamination, as participants in the waitlist control group may share information or techniques with those in the treatment group. The lack of long-term follow-up limits the assessment of the intervention’s sustainability. However, these limitations did not affect the benefits of the intervention.

6. Conclusion

Work environment in Nigeria is demanding and could lead to psychological disturbances. Evidentially, construction workers have confirmed the horrible job stress and work-family conflict they experience in the work place. This has led to work-related burnout. As a matter of importance, this was conducted and found that CBT is beneficial in management of work-family conflict and work burnout among construction industry workers. Therefore, there is need for advancement and adequate implementation of CBT in industries for psychological functioning of workers.

Author contributions

Conceptualization: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Anthony Areji.

Data curation: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Ode Ogbole Adejo, Anthony Areji.

Formal analysis: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Ode Ogbole Adejo, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Ebiegberi Kontei, Ikechukwu Victor Oguejiofor.

Funding acquisition: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Ode Ogbole Adejo, Lebechukwu Calister Nwadi, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Innocent Nwahunanya, Ebiegberi Kontei, Ikechukwu Victor Oguejiofor, Ogechi Nkemjika, Joy Anuri Okereke, John Iliya, Kingsley Udogu, Joshua Onyekachi Ike, Anthony Areji.

Investigation: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Ode Ogbole Adejo, Lebechukwu Calister Nwadi, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Innocent Nwahunanya, Ebiegberi Kontei, Ikechukwu Victor Oguejiofor, Ogechi Nkemjika, Joy Anuri Okereke, Kingsley Udogu, Joshua Onyekachi Ike, Anthony Areji.

Methodology: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Ode Ogbole Adejo, Lebechukwu Calister Nwadi, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Innocent Nwahunanya, Ikechukwu Victor Oguejiofor, Joy Anuri Okereke, John Iliya, Joshua Onyekachi Ike, Anthony Areji.

Project administration: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Ode Ogbole Adejo, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Innocent Nwahunanya, Ebiegberi Kontei, Ikechukwu Victor Oguejiofor, Ogechi Nkemjika, Joy Anuri Okereke, John Iliya, Kingsley Udogu, Joshua Onyekachi Ike, Anthony Areji.

Resources: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Ode Ogbole Adejo, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Ebiegberi Kontei, Ikechukwu Victor Oguejiofor, Ogechi Nkemjika, Joy Anuri Okereke, John Iliya, Kingsley Udogu, Joshua Onyekachi Ike, Anthony Areji.

Software: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Ode Ogbole Adejo, Lebechukwu Calister Nwadi, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Ebiegberi Kontei, Joy Anuri Okereke, John Iliya, Kingsley Udogu, Joshua Onyekachi Ike, Anthony Areji.

Supervision: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Ode Ogbole Adejo, Lebechukwu Calister Nwadi, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Ebiegberi Kontei, Ikechukwu Victor Oguejiofor, Joy Anuri Okereke, Kingsley Udogu, Joshua Onyekachi Ike, Anthony Areji.

Validation: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Ode Ogbole Adejo, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Innocent Nwahunanya, Ikechukwu Victor Oguejiofor, Ogechi Nkemjika, Joy Anuri Okereke, Kingsley Udogu, Joshua Onyekachi Ike, Anthony Areji.

Visualization: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Ode Ogbole Adejo, Lebechukwu Calister Nwadi, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Innocent Nwahunanya, Ogechi Nkemjika, Joy Anuri Okereke, John Iliya, Kingsley Udogu, Anthony Areji.

Writing – original draft: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Lebechukwu Calister Nwadi, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Ogechi Nkemjika, Kingsley Udogu, Anthony Areji.

Writing – review & editing: Godwin Keres Okoro Okereke, Moses Onyemaechi Ede, Lebechukwu Calister Nwadi, Joy Obiageli Oneli, Innocent Nwahunanya, Ebiegberi Kontei, Ikechukwu Victor Oguejiofor, Ogechi Nkemjika, Joy Anuri Okereke, John Iliya, Joshua Onyekachi Ike, Anthony Areji.