Table 1.
Results of hierarchical linear mixed-effects models (Model 7) for predicting weighted workload ratings from background variables, task type, workload source, personality trait scores, and their interactions.
| Predictor | Omnibus effect | B | SE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 0.04 | 0.03 | |
| Marital Status | F(2, 269.8) = 0.95 | ||
| Married | 0.00 | 0.35 | |
| Divorced | 0.63 | 0.51 | |
| Having children | 0.04 | 0.36 | |
| Residence in the region | −0.14 | 0.26 | |
| Education | F(2, 254.5) = 0.12 | ||
| Medium | −0.09 | 0.34 | |
| High | 0.13 | 0.65 | |
| Role | F(2, 281.8) = 1.78 | ||
| Heads | −0.79. | 0.47 | |
| Technician | 0.03 | 0.57 | |
| Years in service | −0.01 | 0.03 | |
| Quartered in barracks | 0.12 | 0.29 | |
| Task | F(3, 7787.4) = 305.97*** | ||
| RED | 3.98*** | 0.51 | |
| OSw/o | −1.46** | 0.49 | |
| Osw | 1.13* | 0.52 | |
| WS | F(5, 7572.9) = 155.72*** | ||
| TEM | 4.82*** | 0.43 | |
| PHY | 2.08*** | 0.43 | |
| EFF | 1.55*** | 0.43 | |
| PER | 1.69*** | 0.43 | |
| FRU | 2.47*** | 0.43 | |
| Task × WS | F(15, 7572.9) = 61.36*** | ||
| RED × TEM | 6.01*** | 0.72 | |
| OSw/o × TEM | −4.77*** | 0.70 | |
| OSw × TEM | 3.90*** | 0.73 | |
| RED × PHY | −3.34*** | 0.72 | |
| OSw/o × PHY | −1.18. | 0.70 | |
| OSw × PHY | 2.03** | 0.73 | |
| RED × EFF | 5.41*** | 0.72 | |
| OSw/o × EFF | −2.23** | 0.70 | |
| OSw × EFF | 3.16*** | 0.73 | |
| RED × PER | −2.25** | 0.72 | |
| OSw/o × PER | 0.26 | 0.70 | |
| OSw × PER | −1.71* | 0.73 | |
| RED × FRU | −8.17*** | 0.72 | |
| OSw/o × FRU | −1.36. | 0.70 | |
| OSw × FRU | −1.19 | 0.73 | |
| PERSONALITY TRAITS | |||
| EXT | 0.12 | 0.28 | |
| AGR | 0.32 | 0.31 | |
| CON | 0.22 | 0.27 | |
| ES | −0.31 | 0.28 | |
| OPE | −0.46 | 0.30 | |
| Task × EXT | F(3, 7767.4) = 0.49 | ||
| RED × EXT | −0.12 | 0.26 | |
| OSw/o × EXT | 0.21 | 0.26 | |
| OSw × EXT | 0.12 | 0.26 | |
| Task × AGR | F(3, 7755.3) = 0.07 | ||
| RED × AGR | −0.04 | 0.29 | |
| OSw/o × AGR | 0.08 | 0.28 | |
| OSw × AGR | −0.05 | 0.30 | |
| Task × CON | F(3, 7777.2) = 1.45 | ||
| RED × CON | −0.22 | 0.25 | |
| OSw/o × CON | −0.50 | 0.24 | |
| OSw × CON | −0.29 | 0.25 | |
| Task × ES | F(3, 7797.1) = 1.56 | ||
| RED × ES | 0.37 | 0.26 | |
| OSw/o × ES | 0.37 | 0.25 | |
| OSw × ES | 0.51 | 0.27 | |
| Task × OPE | F(3, 7765.8) = 0.66 | ||
| RED × OPE | −0.05 | 0.29 | |
| OSw/o × OPE | −0.30 | 0.28 | |
| OSw × OPE | −0.32 | 0.29 | |
| WS × EXT | F(5, 7572.9) = 0.48 | ||
| TEM × EXT | 0.11 | 0.33 | |
| PHY × EXT | −0.02 | 0.33 | |
| EFF × EXT | −0.02 | 0.33 | |
| PER × EXT | 0.04 | 0.33 | |
| FRU × EXT | 0.40 | 0.33 | |
| WS × AGR | F(5, 7572.9) = 5.88*** | ||
| TEM × AGR | 0.81* | 0.37 | |
| PHY × AGR | 0.00 | 0.37 | |
| EFF × AGR | 0.06 | 0.37 | |
| PER × AGR | −0.40 | 0.37 | |
| FRU × AGR | −1.11** | 0.37 | |
| WS × CON | F(5, 7572.9) = 2.34* | ||
| TEM × CON | −0.74* | 0.31 | |
| PHY × CON | −0.10 | 0.31 | |
| EFF × CON | −0.55 | 0.31 | |
| PER × CON | −0.45 | 0.31 | |
| FRU × CON | 0.12 | 0.31 | |
| WS × ES | F(5, 7572.9) = 2.44* | ||
| TEM × ES | −0.41 | 0.33 | |
| PHY × ES | −0.04 | 0.33 | |
| EFF × ES | −0.27 | 0.33 | |
| PER × ES | −0.11 | 0.33 | |
| FRU × ES | −0.85** | 0.33 | |
| WS × OPE | F(5, 7572.9) = 2.38* | ||
| TEM × OPE | 0.45 | 0.36 | |
| PHY × OPE | 0.17 | 0.36 | |
| EFF × OPE | 0.82* | 0.36 | |
| PER × OPE | 0.71* | 0.36 | |
| FRU × OPE | 0.76* | 0.36 | |
B, parameter estimate; SE, standard error of the parameter estimate; RED, Redman; OSw/o, Operational Service Without Intervention; OSw, Operational Service With Intervention; TEM, Temporal Demand; PHY, Physical Demand; EFF, Effort; PER, dissatisfaction with performance; FRU, Frustration; df, degrees of freedom; EXT, Extraversion; AGR, Agreeableness; CON, Conscientiousness; ES, Emotional Stability; OPE, Openness.
*
p < 0.05;
**
p < 0.01;
***
p < 0.001.