Table 3.
The effect of three levels of need for recovery (NFR) after work on work demands and resources that moderate effort at work and resources that reverse cumulative load effects
| Scale or single item | Low NFR group, mean | SD | In- between NFR group, mean | SD | High NFR group, mean | SD | df between groups, and within groups | F value | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Work demands | |||||||||
| Quantitative demands (1–100) | 30.6 | 17.5 | 41.6 | 19.5 | 50.2 | 21 | 2, 1254 | 94.77 | 0.000a |
| Work pace (1–100) | 47.3 | 19.1 | 57.4 | 18.5 | 67.2 | 18.3 | 2, 1257 | 96.541 | 0.000a |
| Emotional demands (1–100) | 40.8 | 26.4 | 52.7 | 24.8 | 64.9 | 25.5 | 2, 1256 | 74.291 | 0.000a |
| Cognitive demands (1–100) | 68.3 | 17.5 | 72 | 16 | 75.0 | 16.2 | 2, 1257 | 14.703 | 0.000a |
| Resources that moderate effort | |||||||||
| Influence (1–100) | 50 | 21 | 42 | 19.6 | 35 | 20.4 | 2, 1253 | 45.692 | 0.000a |
| Single item Influence over resources (0–4) | 1.7 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.1 | 1 | 1.1 | 2, 1251 | 32.775 | 0.000a |
| Support from colleagues (1–100) | 65.9 | 19.2 | 59.1 | 18.5 | 56.9 | 18.7 | 2, 1251 | 24.660 | 0.000b |
| Support from supervisor (1–100) | 64.3 | 23.1 | 57.4 | 21.6 | 51.9 | 23.3 | 2, 1248 | 26.195 | 0.000a* |
| Quality of work (1–16) | 12.3 | 2.3 | 10.3 | 2.5 | 8.2 | 2.9 | 2, 1253 | 2013.507 | 0.000a |
| Single item time for reflection/discussion (0–4) | 2.5 | 1.1 | 2.0 | 1.1 | 1.6 | 1.1 | 2, 1259 | 62.88 | 0.000a |
| Work design cumulative effort-reversing resource | |||||||||
| Recovery opportunities (RO) (0–27) | 17.3 | 5.2 | 14.4 | 5.1 | 12.1 | 4.7 | 2, 1241 | 90.141 | 0.000a |
The table presents means and standard deviation (SD) on the scales and in single items for each NFR group, with ranges in brackets. The measurements from the two extreme cluster groups are presented in bold numbers
aThe effect of NFR was significantly different between all three groups, with p ≥ 0.000
a*The effect of NFR was significantly different between the groups, with p ≥ 0.000, except for the difference between the high NFR group and the in-between NFR group where the level of significance reached p ≥ 0.05
bThe effect of NFR was significantly different between the high NFR group and the low NFR group and between the low NFR group and the in-between NFR group, with p ≥ 0.000. The difference between the high NFR group and the in-between NFR group was n.s