Page 36 - IJSA, Vol. 2, No 1-2, 2019

рrint ISSN: 2617-2682; DOI:10.26697/ijsa IJSA

Introduction examining couple’s production of stress hormones and
Although there are studies have found several methods low family relationships, found that women produced
for dealing with workplace stress, finding effective two particular stress hormones such as cortisol and
coping methods with faculty member’s workplace stress norepinephrine during the discussion. Moreover,
that impacted on their family functioning has still stayed Kiecolt-Glaser et al. (1993) research indicated that
a significant question. ‘Coping’ has been described by couples with satisfying family relationship tended not to
Lazarus & Folkman (1984) as ‘thoughts and acts that infections catch, and they confirm the findings by Beck
people use to manage specific external or internal (1984) that only a positive family interaction may
demands of stressors’. reduce individual’s stress, but relationships that involve
The theoretical analysis has shown that social a negative norms contribute stress (Kiecolt-Glaser et al.,
identification is a significant variable coping with 1993).
workplace stress. According to research in the social- Considering suggestions, social identification and its
psychological platform, social identification is ‘central role for buffering individual’s workplace stress is clear,
to people’s experiences of and reactions to, social and in the present study there is the first attempt to research
environmental stressors’ (Haslam, O’Brien, Jetten, social identification as a moderator for decreasing
Volmedal, & Penna, 2005). ‘Social identification’ has workplace stress’s negative impact on family
been defined by Taifel (1978), ‘an individual’s self- functioning with samples in Kazakhstan. In addition,
concept which derives from his knowledge of his Wang, Repetti, and Campos (2011) found a relation
membership’. Considering this, Ellemers, Koetekaas, between job stress and family social behavior and
and Ouwerkerl (1999) study social identification concluded that workplace stress affects family
divided into three components, a cognitive component, functioning in terms of talking and display of negative
an evaluative component and an emotional component. emotions. There was a significant correlation between
These components have significant effect on members’ these factors (r=0.30, p<0.05). The current study there
social perception, feeling and behaviours (Taifel & takes account of these correlation coefficients, and
Turner, 1979) which is based on individual’s workplace proposes that if workplace stress affects family
stress on family functioning. functioning, social identification would be a significant
In addition, Avanzi et al. study (2018) with samples predictor moderating the relationship between
Swiss teachers found that strongly identified teachers workplace stress and family functioning of Kazakhstan
receive more support from other members of group, and teachers.
consequently lead them lower job burnout which is Thus, the main hypotheses formulated as following:
develops from workplace stress. Similarly, Zellars and H. 1. Workplace stress would be negatively associated
Perrewe (2001) study examining influence of affective with family functioning.
personality to emotional social support and job burnout H. 2. Social identification would be a moderator in a
suggested that individuals who engage conversations relationship between workplace stress and family
that focus on positive aspects of job report less burnout. functioning. Workplace stress’s negative impact on
It is because, interactions with a positive content is a family functioning dependent on individual’s social
significantly related to individual’s job burnout identification level with their family group.
(workplace stress) decrease, thoughts and feelings that The aim of the study. To define the social identification’s
linked with increased perceptions of personal self role for work and family life balance.
(Zellars & Perrewe, 2001) which play role for
individual’s relationship with their family. Materials and Methods
The issues of prevention of mental disorders and their Data were collected from participants with the scales of
impact on the mental health of the individual were multiple – choice questionnaire. The first scale that
studied by Melnyk and Stadnik (2018). measured their workplace stress, participants were
Various aspects of training of future specialists in higher required to respond on questionnaire evaluated their
education were studied by Melnyk and Pipenko (2018). feeling and thought during the last months at work. The
Specifically, family social identity’s role discovered second scale was about how participants perceive the
Baider, Ever-Hadani, Goldzweig, Wygoda, and Peretz quality of their family life. The last questionnaire was
(2003) study, and had shown that individual’s stress concerned with social identification with their family
buffering is directly related to their family, more through scale that consists of three aspects of social
specifically family support which is based on family identity, including ingroup ties, cognitive centrality and
member’s social identification level. They identify ingroup affect.
couples who were experiencing high psychological Types of scales are presented in Figure 1.
distress reported lower levels of perceived family Workplace stress.
support than the normal levels of stress. This concept is The workplace stress variable was measured by the
confirmed by findings reported by Billings and Moos Perceived Stress scale (PSS) that consists of 10 items
(1982) study, and authors concluded that work related (Cohen & Kamarck, 1994). They were asked questions
stress on family relationship is directly associated with (see Table 1), rating their feeling or thought in the last
individual’s family support. Despite men work stressors months at work in a certain way on a scale ranging from
having greater impact, supportive social resources, such 0 to 4 (0 – never, 1 – almost never, 2 – sometimes, 3 –
as family support provided more reduction for the fairly often, 4 – very often).
effects of workplace stress on family functioning.
In addition, Kiecolt-Glaser et al. (1993) study, by
35