Relationship Between Employment Status and Psychological Wellbeing of Adults in Novi Pazar Research Final.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMPLOYMENT STATUS
AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELLBEING OF ADULTS IN

NOVI PAZAR
RESEARCH PAPER
Belgrade, February 2018

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMPLOYMENT STATUS
AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELLBEING OF ADULTS IN
NOVI PAZAR
RESEARCH PAPER
Author:
Davor Glavinić
Belgrade, February 2018
2
Contents
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 5
PART I: METHODOLOGY FRAMEWORK ................................................................................ 7
Methodology ................................................................................................................. 7
Participants ................................................................................................................ 7
Sampling technique ................................................................................................... 7
Materials ....................................................................................................................... 7
Data and expected results.............................................................................................. 8
PART II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND THEORY .................................................................... 9
Literarture review.......................................................................................................... 9
Relationship in theory between employment status and psychological wellbeing of
adults ........................................................................................................................... 13
Employment and health status .................................................................................... 15
Causal relationship between work and health status................................................... 16
Better health status leads to employment.................................................................... 19
Health care costs ......................................................................................................... 20
Evidence from supported employment ....................................................................... 21
Employment and unemployment ................................................................................ 22
PART III: EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ......................................................................................... 24
Results ......................................................................................................................... 24
Discussion of results ................................................................................................... 42
PART IV: OTHER WARIABBLES- EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION .................................................. 45
Job Satisfaction ........................................................................................................... 45
Organizational Factors of Job Satisfaction ................................................................. 46
Personal Job Satisfaction Factors ............................................................................ 48
Effects of Job Satisfaction ....................................................................................... 49
Motivation ................................................................................................................... 52
Material Compensation ........................................................................................... 54
Non-material Compensation .................................................................................... 56
Mobbing at job and mental health .............................................................................. 57
Meaning and terminology........................................................................................ 58
Prevalance and history of mobbing ......................................................................... 58
3
Mobbing victims and tipes .......................................................................................... 59
Mobbing victims ...................................................................................................... 59
Types of Mobbing ................................................................................................... 60
Role in Mobbing process and the risk of mobbing by occupation .......................... 62
The consequences of mobbing ................................................................................ 62
Theoretical models of Mobbing at work ..................................................................... 63
Previous empirical studies about relationship between Mobbing and the working
conditions ................................................................................................................ 65
Literature review and orgaziyational commitment .................................................. 66
Effects of Mobbing on Individual, Organizational and the Society ........................ 68
CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... 71
REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 72
Books .......................................................................................................................... 72
Internet sources ........................................................................................................... 76
APPENDIX ......................................................................................................................... 77
Questionar ................................................................................................................... 77
LIST .................................................................................................................................. 82
Tables .......................................................................................................................... 82
Pictures ........................................................................................................................ 82
ACKNOWLEDGMENT ......................................................................................................... 83
4
INTRODUCTION
Mental health according to World health organization (2014) is when an individual is able
to reach full potential, cope with life stressors, work fruitfully and productively, and is
able to make an impact on the community. APA (2007) also defines mental health as a
state of mind characterized by emotional wellbeing, good behavioural adjustment,
relative freedom from anxiety and disabling symptoms, and a capacity to establish
constructive relationships and cope with ordinary demands and stresses of life.
The concept of positive mental health is considered by mental health practitioners to refer
to the individual having a positive sense of well-being, resources such as self-esteem,
optimism, sense of mastery and coherence, satisfying personal relationships and
resilience or the ability to cope with adversities. These qualities enhance the person’s
capacity to make a meaningful contribution to their family, community and society
(Lavikainen, Lahtinen & Lehtinen, 2000). It is important to remember that good mental
health is not a static state, good mental health is dependent on several factors and a change
in these factors may lead to changes in mental health status. According to Keyes and
Michalec (2009) these are factors and dimensions reflecting mental health as flourishing:
1. Avowed quality of life: is mostly or highly satisfied with life overall or in domains
of life positive functioning
2. Purpose in life: finds own life has a direction and meaning
3. Self-acceptance: holds positive attitudes toward self, acknowledges and likes most
parts of self, personality
4. Personal growth: seeks challenge, has insight into own potential, feels a sense of
continued development
5. Positive affect: is cheerful, interested in life, in good spirits, happy, calm and
peaceful, full of life.
6. These definitions affirmed the existing behavioral and social scientific vision of
mental health as not merely the absence of mental illness but also as the presence
of something positive.
5
The definition of quality of life provided by WHO (as cited in Herrman, Saxena, &
Moodie, 2005) as “an individual’s perception of his/her position in life in the context of
the culture and value systems in which he/she lives, and in relation to his/her goals,
expectations, standards and concerns” reflects a broad view of well-being encompassing
social indicators, happiness and health status.
Mental health is not merely the absence of disease or disorder; it involves self-esteem,
mastery, and the ability to maintain meaningful relationships with others. Horwitz
provides a very thorough overview of how various social conditions affect degrees of
mental health and mental health problems and, consequently, how social context shapes
the definition as well as the response to mental health problems. Jahoda, Morse and Weiss
state that jobs (employment) provide economic rewards and may be a source of identity,
competence, and self-esteem, which are wellbeing factors while unemployment status
usually tends to be the source of stress and ill wellbeing and mental health, cited in Scheid
& Brown, 2009).
Mental, social and behavioural health problems may interact so as to intensify their effects
on behaviour and well-being. Substance abuse, violence, and abuses of women and
children on the one hand, and health problems such as heart disease, depression and
anxiety on the other, are more prevalent and more difficult to cope with in conditions of
high unemployment, low income, limited education, stressful work conditions, gender
discrimination, unhealthy lifestyle and human rights violations (Herrman, Saxena, &
Moodie,2005).
Mental health is influenced by multiple factors, from social changes and circumstances
to personal experiences in the family and society. Having said all above, I intend to
explore the relationship between employment status and psychological wellbeing/mental
health of the adults in Novi Pazar. Particularly, I want to explore the quality of life,
psychological distress, anxiety self-esteem and loneliness in two groups of participants,
employed and unemployed.
6
PART I: METHODOLOGY FRAMEWORK
Methodology
In order to getting better understanding of mental health of employed and unemployed

adults in city of Novi Pazar, quantitative research methods will be used.
Participants
I will try to reach 100 unemployed and 100 employed, both men and women since the
basis of this study is to explore mental health of both. Participants will be Bosniaks and
Serbs who live in Novi Pazar.
Sampling technique
Convenience sampling will be used to reach unemployed participants and snowball

sampling will be used to reach employed participants.
Materials
A Demographics Questionnaire will be devised to gather general information about the

participants such as their age, length of unemployment and length of employment. In
addition, seven instruments will be used:
Manchester short assessment of quality of life

Kessler's scale of psychological stress
GAD 7– generalized anxiety disorder
7
Rosenberg self-esteem scale
UCLA short form of loneliness scale
After conducting the research, results and outcomes will be gained using the SPSS
analytical tool. Each item will be indicated clearly by descriptive statistics (tables). While
conducting a quantitative research, T-test is the most commonly used Statistical Data
Analysis procedure.
Data and expected results
This study will explore mental health of unemployed and employed adults in Novi Pazar.
This study results will contribute properly and develop further understanding of the topic.
In addition, it will add to the discussion on the debate of the topic and will lead new
researches, especially in regions of Balkan. I expect to find some differences in mental
health of unemployed and employed adults in Novi Pazar.
8
PART II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND THEORY
Literarture review
Employment plays a significant role in the identity formation and personal well-being of
all people. Not only does it shape one's financial status, daily activities, and social
interactions (Goodwin & Kennedy, 2005; Jahoda, 1981), but it is related to greater self-
esteem (Hagemoser, 1996). Research has also shown that the transition to employment is
related to decreased psychological distress (Thomas, Benzeval, & Stansfeld, 2005),
whereas the transition to unemployment is related to increased psychological distress
(Flanagan, 1990; Lempers, ClarkLempers, & Simons, 1989; McLoyd, 1989; Thomas et
al., 2005).
Because of the acknowledged importance of employment for well-being, there have been
concerted efforts to support the employment of persons with disabilities, including the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which prohibits discrimination in employment
and requires employers to accommodate people with disabilities, and the Rehabilitation
Act, which mandates the use of federal funding for vocational rehabilitation services and
support activities (American Foundation for the Blind, n.d.). Despite these efforts to
create more employment opportunities, rates of employment among working-age
individuals who are visually impaired (that is, those who are blind or have low vision) are
significantly lower (40%-45%) than are those of the general population (80%), as well as
those of individuals with other disabilities (Kirchner, Schmeidler, & Todorov, 1999;
McNeil, 1993). Because of the low rate of employment, research has focused on
investigating functional barriers to employment for persons with visual impairments and
has posited reasons for the high rates of unemployment, including the lack of employment
skills and motivation, transportation, housing, and access to information (Crudden &
McBroom, 1999; Crudden, Sansing, & Butler, 2005; Moore & Wolffe, 1997; O'Day,
1999).
Research in this area has also focused on the interrelationship between social support
factors and employment status. In an effort to determine the risk factors associated with
unemployment, Leonard and D'Allura (2000) compared the psychosocial characteristics
of employed and unemployed persons with visual impairments who were referred to a
9
vocational placement program at a vision rehabilitation agency. They found that
employed persons reported more encouragement from family and friends, had higher self-
efficacy scores, and were more likely to have received technology training and a college
education than were unemployed persons. Similarly, Roy, Dimigen, and Taylor (1998)
studied the relationship between the employment status and social networks of visually
impaired college graduates in Great Britain. They found that employed college graduates
reported a higher number of social interactions in the past week, had a larger range of
people in their social networks, and reported more helpful familial support than did those
who were unemployed. Conversely, the unemployed college graduates reported fewer
social interactions in the past week, a smaller range of people included in their social
networks, and less helpful familial support; they also experienced the majority of their
social interactions in structured settings (such as a church group) than did their employed
peers, who were far more likely to socialize in unstructured settings (such as public bars).
In short, these studies have established that there are distinct differences in the
characteristics of social support of employed and unemployed people who are visually
impaired.
Moreover, research has repeatedly demonstrated the importance of positive social support
in the rehabilitation process and for employment. Kaplan (1990) found that for
participants with brain injuries who were living in intact families, those who reported
high satisfaction with their social support network were more likely to become employed
than those who reported low satisfaction with their social network. Other research has
emphasized the importance for people with disabilities of support from family members
and friends for both job seeking and job retention and adjustment by boosting motivation
and confidence (Bolton, 1983; Crudden, 2002; Crudden & McBroom, 1999; DeMario,
1992; Kelley & Lambert, 1992; McShane & Karp, 1993; Moore, 1984). Hagemoser
(1996) also found that employment is related to more harmonious familial relationships,
whereas the transition to unemployment is related to increased familial conflict (see also
Flanagan, 1990). These studies have suggested that positive social support is important
to finding and maintaining employment.
More recently, research on social support and the psychosocial characteristics of

employed and unemployed people has centered on the importance of formal support, as
10
evidenced by new studies on the counselor-consumer relationship, the development of
supported employment in the workplace by external agencies, and on the role of the
employer in providing an assistive and accommodative environment for workers with
disabilities (Capella-McDonnall, 2005; Crudden et al., 2005; Forrester-Jones, Jones,
Heason, & Di'Terlizzi, 2004). Specifically, a high-quality relationship between a
counselor and consumer, as rated by an outside observer, was found to be associated with
competitive employment (Cappella-McDonnall, 2005); access to supported employment
agencies, typically external agencies that provide flexible training and support services to
people with disabilities in their work environments, was also related to a larger social
network and positive outcomes (Forrester-Jones et al., 2004). In addition, Crudden et al.
(2005) found that employers who had high expectations of their employees with
disabilities contributed to their employees' success.
Although the literature has demonstrated that positive types of support play a beneficial
role in fostering employment and the transition to employment, there has been little
research on the influence of unhelpful or negative types of support that may undermine
one's ability to become employed. Forms of negative social support include criticism,
anger, or hostility (Ruehlman & Karoly, 1991) and overprotective attitudes and behaviors
(Cimarolli, in press; Cimarolli & Boerner, 2005; Cimarolli,
Reinhardt, & Horowitz, 2006; Diehl & Willis, 2003; Thompson, Galbraith, Thomas,
Swan, & Vrungos, 2002). Research on negative types of support has shown that they have
negative effects on mental health (Hirsch & Rapkin, 1986; Jackson & Lawson, 1995;
Reinhardt, 2001; Rook, 1984) and exacerbate the adverse effects of stressful life
conditions, such as chronic illness (Dunkel-Schetter & Wortman, 1982; Manne & Zautra,
1989; Stephens, Kinney, Norris, & Ritchie, 1987). For people who are visually impaired,
for instance, perceptions of overprotective care were associated with less successful
adaptation to age-related vision loss (Cimarolli et al., 2006) and with higher levels of
depression and anxiety in young and middle-aged adults (Cimarolli, in press).
Despite the demonstrated impact of negative social support on mental health and
psychosocial adaptation to chronic illness and disability, there has been little research on
the relationship between negative social support and employment status. Studies on
unhelpful types of support are important in that they can identify possible reasons why
11
some people have long-term vocational success while others do not and help professionals
develop assessment methods that more accurately determine people's needs so that
providers of vision rehabilitation services can create supportive conditions that may help
individuals who are visually impaired become successfully employed.
Therefore, the primary purpose of the study presented here was to explore the amount of
negative social support experienced (actual received unhelpful types of support and
perceived overprotection) by employed and unemployed adults with visual impairments
to gain further understanding of the differences and similarities in negative support
between the two groups. The study also sought to explore differences in positive social
support, differences in psychological well-being (depression, anxiety, and life
satisfaction), and the sociodemographic and vision- and health-related characteristics of
employed and unemployed working-age adults.
12
Relationship in theory between employment status and psychological
wellbeing of adults
Reducing health care spending is a national priority. As of 2013, health care spending
represented over 17% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Centers for Medicare and
Medicaid Services), with a disproportionate amount of that spending going towards adults
with disabilities. In fact, on a percapita basis, expendi¬tures for people with disabilities
are over four times higher than those for their counterparts without disabilities (Stapleton
& Liu, 2009). This leads them to account for 27- 37% of total health expenditures, which
are largely borne by the public sector, especially Medicaid and Medicare (Anderson,
Armour, Finkelstein, & Wiener, 2010; Stapleton & Liu, 2009).
The National Center on Leadership for the Employment and Economic Advancement of
People with Disabilities (LEAD) is a collaborative of disability, workforce and economic
empowerment organizations led by the National Disability Institute with funding from
the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Disability Employment Policy, Grant No. #OD-
23863-12-75-4-11. This document does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of
the Office of Disability Employment Policy, the U.S. Department of Labor, nor does the
mention of trade names, commercial products or organizations imply endorsement by the
U.S. Government.
Employment programs might be one way to lower these costs. A large body of research
has established that employed individuals are healthier than those who are not employed
(Yelin & Trupin, 2003; Thomas & Ellis, 2013; Ross & Mirowsky, 1995; McKee-Ryan,
Song, Wanberg, & Kinicki, 2005). This association cuts across many demographics,
including gender, age, and disability status (Hartman, undated). Thus, some analysts
hypothesize that enhancing employment opportunities for working-age people with
disabilities may improve health status and thus decrease health care costs. Employment
can improve health by increasing social capital, enhancing psychological well-being,
providing income, and reducing the negative health impacts of economic hardship.
However, while the correlation between health and employment has been well
established, the causal relationship is complicated.
13
Two seemingly competing hypotheses may explain the correlation:
1. Employment increases health status: Employment has social, psychological, and

financial benefits that improve health.
2. Healthy people are more likely to work: Health has an impact on an individual’s
desire to work and their likelihood of being hired or retained.
Using a variety of statistical approaches, researchers have found evidence that both
hypotheses are true. Each explains a portion of the correlation between employment and
health with the relative importance of each theory varying by demographic characteristics
and research methodology. It may be that the two theories are mutually reinforcing rather
than mutually exclusive. Full-time employment improves health, and health bolsters the
odds of full-time employment (Ross & Mirowsky, 1995). These studies though, look at
the general population, and so the magnitude of these correlations for people with
disabilities is less clear.
Although a great deal of research exists on the relationship between employment and
health status for the general population, there is no research on how this relationship
affects costs. A variety of factors complicate the analysis beyond the bi-directional
relationship between employment and health, including the availability and affordability
of health insurance and other determinants of health-related behaviors. This complex and
interrelated set of factors makes it methodologically difficult to determine the impact of
employment on health care costs. Nevertheless, one empirical study suggests the
presence of such a link. Evidence from a study of supported employment clearly shows
that employment increases mental health status and reduces the long-term mental health
care expenditures of people with mental health disabilities (Bush, Drake, Xie, McHugo,
& Haslett, 2009).
This policy brief concludes that employment seems to have a protective impact on health
and thus establishes that an added benefit of investing in the employment of people with
disabilities – beyond the impact on their income and the possible savings from various
social protection programs – would be to lower public expenditures on health care.
14
However, the current state of research cannot accurately gauge the magnitude of the
impact.
This brief is structured as follows: Section 2 presents evidence of the correlation between
employment and health for working-age people with disabilities; Section 3 teases out the
causal relationship between employment and health status using evidence from the
general population and discusses the applicability of these findings to people with
disabilities; Section 4 explores the difficulty in assigning health care cost savings to health
status improvements caused by employment; and Section 5 describes the Supported
Employment study.
Employment and health status
The correlation between employment and health for the general population is well
established and presented in several large-scale literature reviews and meta-analyses that
examine over 300 studies (Paul & Moser, 2009; McKee-Ryan, Song, Wanberg, &
Kinicki, 2005; Marwaha & Johnson, 2004; Ross & Mirowsky, 1995; Mastekaasa , 1996).
Fewer studies have focused specifically on people with disabilities, but several studies
have documented that employment is associated with better health for this population.
For example:
The California Work and Health Survey (1999-2000) revealed that the 54% of
people with disabilities who reported that they were in “excellent, very good, or
good” health were employed compared to only 26% of those who reported they
were in “fair or poor” health (Yelin & Trupin, 2003).
The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey found that employed
individuals with any disability experience mental distress less frequently than
those with a disability who are not employed (18% vs. 40%). This relationship
held up even when controlling for demographics and individual characteristics
including age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, marital status, health risk behaviors,
15
body mass index, health care coverage, and self-rated general health (Okoro,
Strine, McGuire, Balluz, & Mokdad, 2007).
Medicaid recipients with disabilities in North Carolina who used a high level of
health care services were less likely to be employed than those who used fewer
services (Thomas & Ellis, 2013).
Self-reported survey data and secondary claims data analyses of 810 Kansans ages
18-64 with disabilities enrolled in the Medicaid Buy-in in 2011 indicated that
participants with any level of paid employment had significantly lower rates of
smoking and better quality of life. The study also found self-reported health status
was significantly higher and per person/ per month Medicaid expenditures were
lower among those who were employed (Hall, Kurth, & Hunt, 2013).
Work is related to a decrease in mental health symptoms and a higher quality of
life for people with schizophrenia (Marwaha & Johnson, 2004), as well as those
with physical disabilities (Turner & Turner, 2004).
Causal relationship between work and health status
The causal relationship between increased work and improved health most likely runs in
both directions. Employment increases health status, while at the same time healthy
people are more likely to seek and maintain employment. Either explanation could be
behind the strong correlation between the two outcomes.
Employment leads to better health. Quantitative evidence from the general population
highlighted in several meta-analyses and literature reviews points to the health benefits
of work and the detrimental impacts of unemployment. Work can lead to better health
though two mechanisms - financial and psychological.
Financial Benefits: Employment increases household income and decreases economic

hardship, both of which improve physical and psychological well-being. Numerous
studies have demonstrated that poverty leads to poor health status (Thompson, Wells, &
Coats, 2012). Well-paying work provides individuals with the financial means to access
16
heat, nutritious food, health care, and safe housing, all of which impact health directly.
The stress of trying to pay bills and feed and clothe a family on an inadequate household
income generates psycho-physiological distress, malaise and susceptibility to disease
(Montgomery, Cook, Bartley, & Wadsworth, 1999). People with higher incomes are more
likely to have a regular provider of medical care and health insurance coverage. One of
the most significant financial benefits of working (besides income) is health insurance.
A majority of Americans (60%) receive employer-sponsored health insurance (State
Health Access Data Assistance Center, 2013). Individuals with health insurance are more
likely to see their primary care doctor and dentist and receive routine screenings for blood
pressure and cholesterol, and get preventive care.
Psychological Benefits: Employment has long been associated with key components of
mental health including self-esteem, self-worth, purpose and identity. Some
psychologists ascribe to the theory that work provides relationships and social
connections; a time structure on the working day; the assignment of social status; regular
productive activity; and the opportunity to engage in collective efforts greater than could
be achieved alone (Jahoda, 1982). Other psychologists contend that unemployment
affects self-concept because occupation is often an important component of an
individual’s personal identity. Thus, unemployment threatens that identity and can
damage an individual’s sense of selfworth (Turner & Turner, 2004). Quantitative
evidence substantiates that when people lose their jobs, they tend to experience a
significant deterioration in mental health, and when unemployed persons find new jobs,
their mental health improves significantly (McKeeRyan, Song, Wanberg, & Kinicki,
2005).
In much of the research on the relationship between health and employment status, health
status is defined using measures of functioning. Physical illness, impairment of mental
well-being and disability are used as measures of ill health. However, while loss of
function can be an indicator of a change in health status, functional abilities may not serve
as indicators of health status if they are a stable feature of a person’s life (Krahn, Fujiura,
Drum, Cardinal, & Nosek, 2009). For example, if a person has difficulty walking because
they lost their foot in an accident many years ago, it is not a sign of poor health, but rather
17
a sign of a functional limitation. However, if difficulty walking is caused by a congestive
heart condition, then it could be seen as an indicator of poor health.
Unfortunately, while the conceptualization of the health of people with disabilities has
moved from a medical model in which disability is seen as ill health, to a social model in
which people with disabilities can live full healthy lives, the measurement of health status
used in research has not kept up (Krahn, Fujiura, Drum, Cardinal, & Nosek, 2009).
There is a broad consensus among multiple disciplines, government agencies, and

disability groups that these findings generally apply to people with disabilities. Work is
therapeutic; promotes recovery and rehabilitation; leads to better health outcomes;
minimizes the harmful physical, mental and social effects of long-term unemployment;
promotes full participation in society, independence and human rights; reduces poverty;
and improves quality of life and wellbeing (Waddell & Burton, 2006).
However, the magnitude of the impact may differ for people with disabilities compared
to their non-disabled peers. On the one hand, because people with disabilities are more
likely to be economically disadvantaged, the impact of an improved financial situation
may be even more dramatic than it is for people with no disabilities (Turner & Turner,
2004). On the other hand, because many people with disabilities who are not working
qualify for public support programs, the financial impact of not working may be lessened.
In describing the psychological impact of disability for people with physical disabilities,
Turner & Turner (2004) explain that disability may either intensify or weaken the
psychological impact. On the one hand, work may provide validation that an individual
can participate fully in society. Thus, the loss of this validation may lead to a greater
psychological impact for those with disabilities. On the other hand, unemployment may
be perceived as more normative among people with disabilities, while not working may
carry less stigma and result in less psychological impact. Statistical analysis found that
unemployment affects the mental health of people with physical disabilities more than it
affects the mental health of people without physical disabilities, providing support for the
first theory (Turner & Turner, 2004).
Not all jobs have the same impact on health. For example, underemployment may not
provide the same psychological benefits of full employment. In addition, jobs that are
18
over-demanding; depersonalized; provide inadequate rewards; restrict occupational self-
direction; and/or have conflicting demands, physical hazards or poor co-worker
relationships may have negative rather than positive effects on health (Konrad, Moore,
Ng, Doherty, & Breward, 2013). Among employed workers, individuals with disabilities
are more likely than those with no disabilities to be underemployed, experience job
insecurity, and to be in temporary, entry-level and part-time jobs, characteristics that may
affect the positive impact of employment on health status.
Unfortunately, except for studies of the impact of supported employment on people with
mental illness described in section 5 below, there is little direct quantitative evidence on
the physical or mental health benefits of work for people with disabilities (Waddell &
Burton, 2006).
Better health status leads to employment
Evidence from the general population suggests that an individual’s employment status
may be a consequence of their physical or mental health status rather than the cause.
Although the effects of ill health on employment varies by demographic and educational
characteristics (McDonough & Amick III, 2001), generally, people who are less healthy
have a higher probability of losing their jobs and, when unemployed, need more time to
find new employment (Mastekaasa, 1996). Chronic diseases may erode energy and
concentration and thus may undermine required performance leading to job loss (Goetzel,
et al., 2004). Poor mental health, distress, and low selfesteem may reduce the intensity of
an individual’s job search and may affect the impression the applicant makes on the hiring
manager, thereby reducing their chance of being hired (Paul & Moser, 2009). People in
ill health are also more likely to take early retirement than those in good health (Shuring,
Burdorf, Kunst, & Mackenbach, 2007).
Although many studies explore the impact of disability on getting and maintaining
employment, none assess the added impact of health status on the employment of people
with disabilities. It is likely that, similar to the general public, ill health leads to a reduced
19
chance of employment among people with disabilities. In addition to the factors affecting
the general population, people with disabilities may find that ill health compounds the
challenges to employment posed by their disability and declining health may make them
more likely to apply for disability insurance.
Health care costs
In 2012, workers age 18-64 had average health care expenditures of $3,264 compared to
average expenditures for those in the same age group who were not employed of $6,464
. This disparity is caused by a number of factors including age, socio-economic status,
insurance status, disability status, health behaviors, exposure to hazards and others. It is
thus methodologically challenging to estimate a causal relationship between work and
health care costs. With the exception of the supported employment study described below,
no study has assessed the impact of work on health care costs and whether the
improvement in physical or mental health status caused by work has a significant impact
on health care costs.
Theoretically, interventions that improve physical or mental health status can have a
significant impact on health care costs. Working-age (18-64) people in fair or poor health
have more than five-times the number of annual medical provider visits than those in
excellent or very good health (11.6 compared to 2.5 visits) and are almost nine times more
likely to spend at least one night in a hospital (31.3% compared to 3.6%)
Mental health issues also impose costs by exacerbating medical conditions and by
increasing the cost of caring for those conditions. Issues such as anxiety and depression
can worsen the course of chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes,
obesity, asthma, epilepsy, and cancer, and weaken the immune system (American
Psychological Association, 2014). Patients with anxiety or depression have medical care
costs that are between one-and-a-half to two times as high as those without mental health
issues, even after adjusting for differences in medical conditions (Simon, Ormel,
VonKorff, & Barlow, 1995).
20
To some extent, the relationship between health status and health care costs should be the
same for people with disabilities who are at risk for the same ailments and conditions as
people in the general population (e.g., injury, obesity, hypertension and the common
cold). However, this could be exacerbated by the addition of specific risks for secondary
conditions that can damage their health status and increase health care costs.
In some cases, the process of maintaining good health through effective use of
rehabilitation, medications, assistive medical technology, and other interventions may
increase health care costs while increasing the chance of employment. Some people with
disabilities who are not working report that they would be able to work if their need for
disability-related health care services were met (Henry, Long-Bellil, Zhang, &
Himmelstein, 2011). In this situation, employment could be related to both an increase in
health and an increase in health care costs.
Evidence from supported employment
In the only longitudinal study in the U.S. that explores the impact of work on health care
costs for people with disabilities, researchers at Dartmouth Medical School found that
individuals with a serious mental illness, who maintained work with an average of 13.8
hours per week (5,060 hours per year), had lower mental health care costs than those who
were unemployed or not steadily employed. Over the course of the study’s 10 years,
individuals who maintained steady employment had mental health medical costs that
were $166,350 less per person than the group that was unable to maintain consistent
employment (Bush, Drake, Xie, McHugo, & Haslett, 2009).
The study, which followed 187 participants in an Individual Placement and Support (IPS)
model Supported Employment program, clearly shows a correlation between employment
and health care costs. In the first year of the program, people who were employed had an
increase in outpatient utilization and a decrease in inpatient utilization. This increase in
outpatient utilization is not surprising because IPS integrates employment with mental
health treatment at the outset. After the first year, both outpatient and inpatient utilization
21
and service costs decreased dramatically for participants who were working steadily
compared to those who were not working or working only minimally.
The study’s authors used three approaches to tease out the causal relationship (i.e., Does
employment increase mental health or were people with better mental health more likely
to be working steadily?). First, they statistically controlled for education, age, previous
work, and illness severity and found that the same relationship exists between
employment and decreased health care costs. Second, they identified a temporal
relationship where cost reduction followed engagement in employment. Third, they
interviewed clients and found that many reported that working enabled them to manage
their symptoms better and to leave the mental health system (Bush, Drake, Xie, McHugo,
& Haslett, 2009). These finding are supported by studies of IPS in Europe (Kilian, et al.,
2012).
Employment and unemployment
Employment can improve an individual’s physical and mental well-being, while job loss
can have a detrimental effect. At the same time, poor health can impact the ability of an
individual to get and maintain a job.
Working age people with disabilities are less likely to be employed than those without
disabilities. They are also more likely to have depression, anxiety, and chronic disease
including diabetes, heart disease and obesity. Their lack of employment exacerbates these
conditions, creating a cycle where unemployment leads to ill health and ill health leads
to unemployment.
Given that work can be good for health, it is likely that working reduces health care costs.
However, research in this area is limited because it is methodologically challenging to
arrive at quantitative estimates of the causal relationship between work and health care
costs. Although it may be difficult to determine the proportion of healthcare cost savings
due to employment, inferences may be drawn from the positive impact that work has on
well-being.
22
Using a variety of statistical approaches, researchers have found evidence that both
hypotheses are true. Each explains a portion of the correlation between employment and
health with the relative importance of each theory varying by demographic characteristics
and research methodology. It may be that the two theories are mutually reinforcing rather
than mutually exclusive. Full-time employment improves health, and health bolsters the
odds of full-time employment (Ross & Mirowsky, 1995). These studies though, look at
the general population, and so the magnitude of these correlations for people with
disabilities is less clear.
23
PART III: EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
Results
In this project we assayed the sample of the group of 200 respondents. The sample is
dividual acording to employment status. One half of that sample are employed
respondents, and the other half are respondents from employment office.
Gender
Frequenc Percent Valid Cumulative

y Percent Percent
Vali 2 2.0 2.0 2.0

d
Mušk 100 49.0 49.0 51.0
o
Žensk 100 49.0 49.0 100.0

o
Total 202 100.0 100.0
Tablica 1. Gender structure of respondents
In the examined sample, there are a total of 100 male and female respondents, equally
represented by both groups. A graphic representation of the response structure is
presented in the following chart.
24
Figure 1. Age structure of respondents
Tablica 2. Age structure of respondents
Starosna struktura
y Percent Percent
Valid do 25 godina 50 24.8 25.0 25.0
Od 25 do 35 58 28.7 29.0 54.0
Od 35 do 45 32 15.8 16.0 70.0
Od 45 do 55 44 21.8 22.0 92.0
Preko 55 godina 16 7.9 8.0 100.0
Total 200 99.0 100.0
Missi System 2 1.0
ng
Total 202 100.0
Data analysis shows that the sample has the highest number of respondents aged between
25 and 35 years, 28.7%, then up to 25 years old, 24.8%, 45 to 55, 22%, 35 to 45 years
25
15.8 %, and the smallest group of respondents are over 55 years of age. The graphic
representation of the response structure is presented in the next chart.
Tablica 3. Marital status
Bračno stanje

y Percent Percent
Vali Udata/ Oženjen 114 56.4 57.0 57.0

d
Nije udata/ Nije 86 42.6 43.0 100.0
oženjen
Total 200 99.0 100.0
Miss System 1 1.0

ing
Total 201 100.0
26
In the sample, 56.4% were married, while the other 42.6% were not. The graphic
representation of the response structure is presented in the following chart.
Tablica 4. Education structure
Stepen obrazovanja

y Percent Percent
Valid SSS 76 38.0 38.0 38.0
VSS 88 44.0 44.0 82.0
Mr 30 15.0 15.0 97.0
Dr 6 3.0 3.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
27
In the examined sample, 38% of respondents had gradueted high school, 44% gradueted
university, 15% masters respondents and only 3% of doctors of sciences. The graphic
representation of the response structure is presented in the following chart.
Tablica 5. Having kid/s
Da li imate djece

y Percent Percent
Valid Da 82 41.0 41.0 41.0
Ne 118 58.0 58.0 99.0
1 1.0 1.0 100.0
Total 201 100.0 100.0
28
Data analysis showed that 41% of the sample surveyed have a child, while the rest of 58%
of respondents answered negatively on this claim. A graphic representation of the
response structure is presented in the following chart.
Tablica 6. Employment/ unemployment
Da li ste zaposleni

y Percent Percent
Vali Da 100 50.0 50.0 50.0

d
Ne 100 50.0 50.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
29
Data analysis showed that 50% of respondents from the sample examined are currently
employed, while 50% are not employed. A graphic representation of the structure of the
response presented in the following graphic representation.
Tablica 7. Emotions and reactions in different circumstances (Part I)
Report
Da li ste zaposleni Uopšteno Želio bih da imam Osjećam da nema
govoreći, više puno toga čime
zadovoljan sam samopoštovanja bih se mogao
sobom prema samom sebi ponositi
Da Mean 3.9400 2.2200 2.0800
N 50 50 50
Std. .79308 .91003 .72393
Deviation
Ne Mean 2.6600 4.0200 3.7400
N 50 50 50
30
Std. .89466 .68482 .77749
Deviation
Test T – test p = 0,000 < p = 0,000 < 0,05 p = 0,000 < 0,05
0,05
Total Mean 3.3000 3.1200 2.9100
N 100 100 100
Std. 1.05887 1.20839 1.12002
Deviation
The focus of the analysis is the existence of differences between respondents who are
employed and unemployed by feelings and reactions in different situations. The analysis
shows that respondents who are employed agree with the claim that in general they are
satisfied with themselves, while respondents who are not employed mostly disagree with
this assertion. Employed respondents do not agree with the claim that they would like to
have more self-esteem, while those who are unemployed agree with this claim, which
shows the average grade of the received answers. Also, there is a difference in gender,
which is not statistically significant. Employed respondents do not agree with the
assertion they feel that they do not have much to be proud of, while respondents who are
not employed do not agree to the statement above. Furthermore, the T test showed that
there is a significant statistical difference between the attitudes of the respondents who
are employed and those who are not in all the analyzed claims in Table 6, since p <0.05.
In this case, there is a statistically significant difference between employed men and
women in the overall mood and satisfaction in life.
31
Tablica 8. Emotions and reactions in different circumstances (Part II)
Report
Da li ste zaposleni Poneka Sposoban sam S Osjećam da
d se da radim i vremena sam isto
osećam izvršavam na vreme toliko
potpun zadatke osjećam sposoban
o podjednako se da koliko i
bskoris uspiješno kao i ništa ne drugi ljudi
nim većina drugih vrijedim
ljudi
Da Mean 2.2400 4.0800 1.7200 4.0400
N 50 50 50 50
Std. Deviation .77090 .60068 .64015 .75485
Ne Mean 3.8200 4.2000 2.7200 2.8400
N 50 50 50 50
Std. Deviation .80026 .63888 .83397 .81716
Test T – test p = p = 0,051 > 0,05 p = 0,000 p = 0,000 <
0,000 < < 0,05 0,05
0,05
Total Mean 3.0300 4.1400 2.2200 3.4400
N 100 100 100 100
Std. Deviation 1.1142 .61987 .89420 .98801
3
Respondents who are employed mostly disagree with the claim that they sometimes feel
completely useless, while the respondents who are unemployed are somewhat in
agreement with that claim. The sample of employed female respondents agrees with the
statement that they are able to work and perform tasks equally well as most other people,
just like those who are unemployed. Data analysis showed that employed females
absolutely disagree with the claim that from time to time they feel that nothing is
worthwhile, while respondents who are unemployed generally do not agree with this
claim. The average value of 1.72, or 2.72, is shown. Data analysis shows that male
respondents feel as capable as other people, while respondents who are unemploymed
generally disagree with the above statement. The T test shows that for all variables there
is a significant statistical difference between employed and unemployed respondents,
32
except for the variability of the ability to work and perform their work tasks just like other
people, where p> 0.05.
Tablica 9. Emotions and reactions in different circumstances (Part III)
Report
Da li ste zaposleni Osećam se da Sve više dolazim Mislim da vredim
posjedujem niz do saznanja da bar koliko i drugi
vrednih osobina jako malo ljudi
vrijedim
Da Mean 4.0000 1.9800 4.0600
N 50 50 50
Std. .45175 .79514 .61974
Deviation
Ne Mean 3.2600 2.8000 2.9400
N 50 50 50
Std. .92162 1.04978 1.05772
Deviation
Test T – test p = 0,001 < 0,05 p = 0,000 < 0,05 p = 0,000 < 0,05
Tot Mean 3.6300 2.3900 3.5000
al N 100 100 100
Std. .81222 1.01399 1.02986
Deviation
Employed respondents agree with the statement that they feel they have a number of
valuable qualities, while the respondents who are not in the working-class are meant to
be divided.
Furthermore, the data analysis shows that employed respondents disagree with the claim
that they increasingly come to the realization that very little is valid, while unemployed
respondents have divided opinions according to this claim. Employed respondents agree
with the claim that they consider themselves as valid as other people, while respondents
who are not employed have a divided opinion on the above assertion.The T test showed
33
that there are significant statistical differences between the samples where the employed
respondents and those who are not, since p <0,05.
Tablica 10. Problems in the last 2 weeks- Part one
Report
Da li ste zaposleni Osjećaj Niste mogli da Previše ste Poteškoć
nervoze, prestanete da brinuli o e sa
teskobe ili brinete ili različitim opuštanje
osjećaj da ste kontrolišete stvarima m
na ivici živaca zabrinustost
Da Mean 1.5400 1.5200 1.8200 1.6000
N 50 50 50 50
Std. .81341 .81416 .87342 .80812
Deviatio
n
Ne Mean 2.7200 2.4400 2.2000 2.1400
N 50 50 50 50
Std. .72955 .76024 .88063 .88086
Deviatio
n
Test T – test p = 0,000 < p = 0,000 < 0,05 p = 0,000 < p = 0,000
0,05 0,05 <0,05
Total Mean 2.1300 1.9800 2.0100 1.8700
N 100 100 100 100
Std. .97084 .90988 .89324 .88369
Deviatio
n
Data analysis showed that employed respondents absolutely disagree that for the last two
weeks they had a feeling of nervousness, anxiety, or feeling that they are on the verge of
nerves, while the opinions of non-working respondents are divided according to this
assertion, where the average grade of 2.72 shows it.
34
Also, employed respondents absolutely disagree with the claim that they could not stop
worrying and control the concern, while the non-working respondents generally disagree
with this claim, which confirms the average response of 2.44.
Working respondents do not agree with the claim that over the past two weeks they have
been overly concerned about different things, similar attitude have unemployed
respondents however, the average value is a bit higher than the other sample.
The data analysis showed that employed respondents absolutely disagree with the claim
that they had a problem with relaxation in the last two weeks, while non-working
respondents disagree with this claim with a slightly higher average response value.
The T test shows that there are differences in responses between them are not significant
yet, which confirms the tested value, where p <0.05 in all tested variables in Table 9.
Tablica 11. Problems in the last 2 weeks- Part II
Report
Da li ste zaposleni Bili ste toliko Lako biste Bilo vas je
nervozni/nemirni da se naljutili strah da bi se
niste mogli da stojite n ili ste bili nešto strašno
jednom mjestu razdrežljivi moglo dogoditi
Da Mean 1.1800 1.6400 1.6200
N 50 50 50
Std. .43753 .80204 .75295
Deviation
Ne Mean 1.7800 1.8600 1.9000
N 50 50 50
Std. .91003 .80837 .83910
Deviation
Test T – test p = 0,000 < 0,05 p = 0,059 > p = 0,041 <
0,05 0,05
Total Mean 1.4800 1.7500 1.7600
N 100 100 100
Std. .77172 .80873 .80554
Deviation
35
Respondents who are in employment absolutely disagree with the claim that they were so
nervous that they could not stand in one place, the same opinion was also given by
respondents who are unemploymed, but with less convincing average value of the answer.
Respondents who are employed absolutely disagree with the claim that they would easily
get angry over the past two weeks, and non-employed respondents answered similary.
Data analysis showed that working respondents absolutely disagree with the assertion that
they were afraid that something terrible could happen, while non-working respondents
have a similar attitude, but less convincing than the previous group.
The T test has shown that for all variables there is a significant statistical difference except
in terms of variables that they were easily frowned and irritable in the last two weeks.
Tablica 12. Self consideration
Report
Da li ste zaposleni Nedostaje Već dugo Nitko me S drugima
mi društvo nisam ni sa dobro ne ne djelim
kim blizak/ poznaje svoja
bliska mišljenja i
ideje
Da Mean 2.1400 2.7000 1.9400 2.3800
N 50 50 50 50
Std. 1.03036 1.12938 1.09563 1.12286
Deviation
Ne Mean 3.5600 2.8800 2.4600 3.0600
N 50 50 50 50
Std. .88433 1.13641 1.34331 1.03825
Deviation
Test T – test p = 0,000 < p = 0,120 > p = 0,000 < p = 0,000 <
0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05
Total Mean 2.8500 2.7900 2.2000 2.7200
N 100 100 100 100
Std. 1.19236 1.13079 1.24722 1.12887
Deviation
36
The analysis of the questions that relate on how respondents perceive themselves shows
that working respondents do not agree with the claim that they lack with society, while
respondents who are unemployed are somewhat in agreement with the stated claim.
Data analysis shows that the opinions of both groups of respondents are divided on the
claim that they have not been close to anyone for a long time.
In addition, data analysis shows that the attitudes of respondents who are employed do
not agree with the claim that no one is well aware of them, while respondents who are not
in employment generally disagree with this claim. The answer given by respondents who
are not in employment is more prone to neutral opinion, than the other group of
respondents.
Furthermore, the data analysis shows that the employed respondents disagree with the
claim that they do not share their opinions with others, while the attitudes of the non-
employed respondents are divided, is the average answer, which is 3.06.
The T test showed that there is a significant statistical difference between the two groups
of subjects (because p <0.05), except for one assertion, which is that they have not been
close to anyone for a long time, where p> 0.05.
Tablica 13. Self consideration- Part II
Report
Da li ste zaposleni Moji socijalni Nesretan/na sam Ljudi su oko
odnosi su što sam tako mene ali ne i sa
površni povučen/na mnom
Da Mean 2.4600 2.1000 1.7800
N 50 50 50
Std. Deviation 1.12866 .97416 .78999
Ne Mean 3.2000 3.0200 2.4200
N 50 50 50
Std. Deviation .90351 1.07836 .83520
Test T – test p = 0,000 < p = 0,000 < 0,05 p = 0,000 <
0,05 0,05
Total Mean 2.8300 2.5600 2.1000
N 100 100 100
Std. Deviation 1.08297 1.12205 .87039
37
Employed respondents do not agree that their social relations are superficial, while
unemployed respondents have divided opinions on this claim, which show the average
values of the response.
Employed respondents disagree with the claim that they are unhappy that they are
withdrawn, while the opinions of non-employed respondents are divided on this issue.
The opinion of the respondents in employment is completely negative on the claim that
defines loneliness. Therefore, the claim: "People are around but not with them," where
the average value of 1.78 confirms, while the opinions of non-employed respondents are
somewhat more positive, but its still negative with the average value of 2.42.
Data analysis using the t test shows that there is a significant statistical difference between
the two groups of subjects for all tested variables, since p <0.05.
Tablica 14. How often do you feel certain symptoms expressed by the claims, during a
month- Part one
Report
Da li ste zaposleni ........um ......be ..........nemi ..........toliko .........
orno bez znade rno i nervzno da me nervoz
razloga žno uzvrpoljen nista ne može no
o smiriti
Da Mean 3.5600 4.800 4.3600 4.4600 3.760
0 0
N 50 50 50 50 50
Std. .97227 .4517 .66271 .73429 .7160
Deviation 5 0
Ne Mean 2.5400 3.840 3.5000 3.0800 3.180
0 0
N 50 50 50 50 50
Std. 1.03431 .7384 .76265 .94415 4.424
Deviation 5 84
Test T – test p = 0,000 p = p = 0,000 < p = 0,000 < p =
< 0,05 0,000 0,05 0,05 0,000
< 0,05 < 0,05
Total Mean 3.0500 4.320 3.9300 3.7700 3.470
0 0
N 100 100 100 100 100
Std. 1.12254 .7769 .83188 1.09041 3.166
Deviation 4 92
38
Data analysis showed that the unemployed and those who are not feel so nervous that
they can not sit quietly, this claim is proven by very high average grades of both examined
groups.
Employed respondents rarely feel that they are working hard, while respondents who are
not employed sometimes feel the same way.
The data analysis showed that respondents who were employed responded that they never
felt so depressed that nothing could make them nervous, while respondents who did not
have a job answered that it rarely happened to them for the last month.
Respondents who have been employed answered that they rarely feel worthless, while
respondents who are unemployed responded that this happened in the previous month,
so, sometimes they felt that way.
Data analysis showed that respondents who are employed never feel unsatisfaid, while
respondents who are not in employment responded that this happened in the previous
month.
The T test showed that there is a significant satistic difference across all the variables in
the previous table between employed and those who are not, because the tested p value is
less than 0.05.
39
month- Part two
Report
Da li ste .........tolik .........da .........toliko ......... ..........depr
zaposleni o nervozno je sve depresivno da bezvre esivno
da ne napor me ništa ne dno
mogu da može
sedim oraspoložiti
mirno
Da Mean 4.8000 4.3600 4.9200 4.340 4.5600
0
N 50 50 50 50 50
Std. .49487 .80204 .27405 .7174 .81215
Deviati 2
on
Ne Mean 4.1600 3.8600 4.0400 2.800 3.7600
0
N 50 50 50 50 50
Std. .88893 .98995 .75485 1.049 .77090
Deviati 78
on
Test T – test p = 0,010 < p = p = 0,000 < 0,05 p = p = 0,000 <
0,05 0,000 < 0,000 0,05
0,05 < 0,05
Total Mean 4.4800 4.1100 4.4800 3.570 4.1600
0
N 100 100 100 100 100
Std. .78470 .93090 .71746 1.182 .88443
Deviati 83
on
The analysis of data has shown that the respondents who are unemployed and those who
never feel so nervous that they can not sow calmly, this claim proves very high average
scores of both groups.
Resident respondents rarely feel that all efforts are made, while non-employed
respondents sometimes feel that way. Data analysis showed that respondents responded
that they never felt so depressed that they could not cheer them up, while non-working
respondents responded that they rarely did so for the last month. Respondents who were
in the job interview responded that they rarely felt worthless, while respondents who were
unemployed responded that they did sometimes feel that they were in the previous month.
40
Data analysis has shown that respondents who are employed never feel reluctant, while
respondents who are not in the job interview have responded that they did sometime in
the previous month.
T test showed that there is a significant saturation difference across all the variables in
the previous table between the respondents employed and those who did not, since the p
value tested was less than 0.05.
41
Discussion of results
At the end it is important to prove that we have proven all our hypotheses and research
questions. Data analysis showed that employed respondents absolutely disagree that for
the last two weeks they had a feeling of nervousness, anxiety, or feeling that they are on
the verge of nerves, while the opinions of non-working respondents are divided according
to this assertion, where the average grade of 2.72 shows it.
Also, employed respondents absolutely disagree with the claim that they could not stop
worrying and control the concern, while the non-working respondents generally disagree
with this claim, which confirms the average response of 2.44.
Working respondents do not agree with the claim that over the past two weeks they have
been overly concerned about different things, similar attitude have unemployed
respondents however, the average value is a bit higher than the other sample.
The data analysis showed that employed respondents absolutely disagree with the claim
that they had a problem with relaxation in the last two weeks, while non-working
respondents disagree with this claim with a slightly higher average response value.
The T test shows that there are differences in responses between them are not significant
yet, which confirms the tested value, where p <0.05 in all tested variables in Table 9.
Respondents who are in employment absolutely disagree with the claim that they were so
nervous that they could not stand in one place, the same opinion was also given by
respondents who are unemploymed, but with less convincing average value of the answer.
Respondents who are employed absolutely disagree with the claim that they would easily
get angry over the past two weeks, and non-employed respondents answered similary.
Data analysis showed that working respondents absolutely disagree with the assertion that
they were afraid that something terrible could happen, while non-working respondents
have a similar attitude, but less convincing than the previous group.
The T test has shown that for all variables there is a significant statistical difference except
in terms of variables that they were easily frowned and irritable in the last two weeks.
42
The analysis of the questions that relate on how respondents perceive themselves shows
that working respondents do not agree with the claim that they lack with society, while
respondents who are unemployed are somewhat in agreement with the stated claim.
Data analysis shows that the opinions of both groups of respondents are divided on the
claim that they have not been close to anyone for a long time.
In addition, data analysis shows that the attitudes of respondents who are employed do
not agree with the claim that no one is well aware of them, while respondents who are not
in employment generally disagree with this claim. The answer given by respondents who
are not in employment is more prone to neutral opinion, than the other group of
respondents.
Furthermore, the data analysis shows that the employed respondents disagree with the
claim that they do not share their opinions with others, while the attitudes of the non-
employed respondents are divided, is the average answer, which is 3.06.
The T test showed that there is a significant statistical difference between the two groups
of subjects (because p <0.05), except for one assertion, which is that they have not been
close to anyone for a long time, where p> 0.05.
Employed respondents do not agree that their social relations are superficial, while
unemployed respondents have divided opinions on this claim, which show the average
values of the response.
Employed respondents disagree with the claim that they are unhappy that they are
withdrawn, while the opinions of non-employed respondents are divided on this issue.
The opinion of the respondents in employment is completely negative on the claim that
defines loneliness. Therefore, the claim: "People are around but not with them," where
the average value of 1.78 confirms, while the opinions of non-employed respondents are
somewhat more positive, but its still negative with the average value of 2.42.
Data analysis using the t test shows that there is a significant statistical difference between
the two groups of subjects for all tested variables, since p <0.05.
43
Data analysis showed that the unemployed and those who are not feel so nervous that
they can not sit quietly, this claim is proven by very high average grades of both examined
groups.
Employed respondents rarely feel that they are working hard, while respondents who are
not employed sometimes feel the same way.
The data analysis showed that respondents who were employed responded that they never
felt so depressed that nothing could make them nervous, while respondents who did not
have a job answered that it rarely happened to them for the last month.
Respondents who have been employed answered that they rarely feel worthless, while
respondents who are unemployed responded that this happened in the previous month,
so, sometimes they felt that way.
Data analysis showed that respondents who are employed never feel unsatisfaid, while
respondents who are not in employment responded that this happened in the previous
month.
The T test showed that there is a significant satistic difference across all the variables in
the previous table between employed and those who are not, because the tested p value is
less than 0.05.
44
PART IV: OTHER WARIABBLES- EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION
Job Satisfaction
The most important of all attitutes of employees is their attitude towards work. That
attitude is called job satisfaction and we can define it as “cognitive, affective and
evaluation reactions of individuals to their job”. Hence, job satisfaction is a complex
attitude which includes certain assumptions and beliefs about that job (the cognitive
component), affections towards the job (affective component) and evaluation of the job
(evaluation component). Job satisfaction presents one of the most researched topics in the
field of human behavior in organizations. The reason for that is most certainly the well-
established belief that a satisfied employee is a productive employee and that the success
of an organization cannot be achieved with dissatisfied employees. The theoretical basis
of job satisfaction is presented in Locke’s Theory of value. According to that theory, job
satisfaction exists to that extent to which people are satisfied with the outcome of their
work. The more the individual gets from the outcome which he values, the more they will
be satisfied. Therefore, job satisfaction is not only dependent on the amount of the award
but also on the type of the reward, i.e. if the worker values the type of reward which they
get for the work which they have done.
According to that theory, workers, i.e. employees, who receive a low salary do not have
to be dissatisfied with their job if the salary is not the most important factor in determining
their job satisfaction rate. For example, if the workers are creative, young, developing
engineers it is possible that they will be satisfied with a low salary if they have the
opportunity to be creative, to perfect themselves, to learn and advance in that field since
that is what they value about their work. So, in order to predict someone’s job satisfaction
we have to take into consideration not only the satisfaction with individual aspects of the
work of the individual but also their expectations from that work. Disharmony or
dissatisfaction with expectations from work can affect the individual job satisfaction in
some aspects. Some persons will not be satisfied with their job even though they have a
high salary and they are satisfied with their salary but they do not have the possibility to
advance in their career. Locke’s theory also includes another important phenomenon.
People have the tendency to relate job satisfaction with individual aspects of the work
45
and the amount of disharmony between expectations and satisfaction. Namely, those
aspects where the disharmony between expectations and satisfaction is great, the absolute
height of satisfaction has the tendency to decrease. Research shows that employees were
least satisfied with those aspects of work in which the disharmony between expectation
and satisfaction was the greatest and vice versa. What is it that influences employees to
be satisfied with their work? Research shows that all factors can be grouped into two
categories: the organization and personal job satisfaction.
Organizational Factors of Job Satisfaction
The job itself. People are more satisfied if they do work which is mentally challenging
than if it is simple and routine. A challenging job has three characteristics: it enables the
employee to perform various kinds of tasks, it gives the freedom of activity to the
employee and it enables feedback to the employee about their job performance.
System of rewarding. The higher the salary the greater the satisfaction rate is in
employees. However, it must be noted that the perceived fairness of the system of
rewarding is a more important factor than the mere height of the salary. This was
concluded in all research conducted in domestic enterprises. Workers are more satisfied
if they perceive that the system of rewarding is fair and treats everyone equally. The
workers have higher expectations of the system of rewarding to be fair than of the height
of the salary.
Comfortable working conditions. It is logical that the better the working conditions are,
the more the workers will be satisfied. This is not only the case because they feel more
comfortable physically but because better working conditions enable them to their own
jobs better. People are often dissatisfied with poor working conditions not because they
are uncomfortable for them but because they prevent them from achieving better results.
Colleagues. The social atmosphere is an important factor when it comes to job

satisfaction. Employees are more satisfied with their job if they work with colleagues
with whom they have excellent personal relations and if the social environment at the
46
work place is comfortable. This is especially important for people who are not that
interested in climbing up the career ladder. Within this factor is the relationship between
the employee and their superior (boss). If the employee has a close relationship with the
employee and if the boss praises the employee more often, follows up on their work and
builds an open relationship with them, than the satisfaction of the employee is greater. It
also must be noted that the national culture can have a significant impact on job
satisfaction. It is logical to assume that in collectivist cultures, the significance of a
comfortable social atmosphere and non-existence of conflict is a very important factor in
job satisfaction in most employees, even more important than the height of the salary.
Some research show that this is absolutely important for all enterprises. In every domestic
enterprise, the most important aspects of work, the ones which have the highest
expectation rate in employees, are indeed those which are connected to the social
environment: good relation with colleagues, good relations with superiors, non-existence
of conflict, socializing with colleagues after work etc. The conclusion is that the job
satisfaction of our workers is more influenced by the social environment than the height
of the salary which explains, among other things, why there are few strikes and
dissatisfaction of workers in comparison to their living standard.
Organizational structure. Research in the U.S. shows that employees are more satisfied
if the organization is more decentralized and if they have more possibilties of participation
in decision-making. This argument seems logical but one must take into consideration the
possibilty of its cultural restrictions. Namely, decentralization can be a source of
satisfaction of employees only if they assume and expect that the power in the
organization should be equally distributed. However, that is only the case in national
cultures which have a low so called power distance. In cultures with a high power
distance, employees neither expect nor prefer their own involvement in decision-making
and decentralization will probably have no effect in their satisfaction rate.
Research conducted in domestic organization shows that one other characteristic of

organizational structure is the source of satisfaction of employees – transparency and
stability. Employees in our enterprises are more satisfied if the organizational structure is
clear, known and stable. This can be connected to another characteristic of our national
culture – avoiding incertitude.
47
Our worker do not like changes, incertitude, ambiguity and it is logical that they expect
from the structure to spare them of that. If the organization manages to do so, this will be
a great source of satisfaction for employees, if not than they will be highly dissatisfied.
Personal Job Satisfaction Factors
Harmony between personal interest and job. Workers will be more satisfied if their
personal profile, skills and knowledge better suit their job requirements. In that case, the
worker feels that his job enables him to express his knowledge and skills, his personality
and competences and this will make him more satisfied. The influence of this factor is
indirect. Harmony between competences and job requirements will lead to better work
results which will lead to greater rewards and finally a higher satisfaction rate in
employees.
Years of service and old age. Older people and people with more years of service have
a tendency to be more satisfied with work than those with less years of service. That is
not just happening because the longer you work the better you get at your job but also
because of the earlier described cognitive dissonance. Even the ones who were not
satisfied with their job at the beginning, if they stuck with it longer, they rationalize their
inertness by convincing themselves they are satisfied with their job. Research shows that
job satisfaction increased with years of service and old age but not in a linear fashion.
First, job satisfaction increases greatly in the early thirties since worker become more
successful and advance in their careers. In their forties, workers reach the zenith in their
job, they lose illusions they previously had and are less satisfied and in the second half of
the fifties and until retirement, their job satisfaction increases again.
Position and status. The higher the hierarchical rank of the employee the more satisfied
they are with the work they are doing. Among other things, the cause of this is that the
higher the status – the higher the income as well as status symbols, authority and social
influence which leads to higher job satisfaction.
Total satisfaction with life. Research proved the effect of “satisfaction spillover”.
48
Satisfaction with life in general positively reflects on the satisfaction of work with which
one does and vice versa.
Effects of Job Satisfaction
Being satisfied with the job one does is not a goal in itself. Nevertheless, more theories
emerge according to which the social responsibility of an enterprise is to provide
satisfaction to their employees in the same way they provide satisfaction to their
stakeholders. More and more authors are dealing with this problem since it assumes that
a more satisfied worker is a more productive worker. However, empirical research shows
that the relationship between productivity and satisfaction of employees is not that clear
as it may seem at first glance. Besides, satisfaction does not only influence productivity
but also some other occurrences in the organization such as work-leave or fluctuation.
49
Model of Job Satisfaction
FULFILLMENT
EMPLOYEES EMPLOYEES
DISSATISFACTION DEDICATION SATISFACTION
INVOLVEMENT
Factors which contribute to Factors which contribute to

dissatisfaction: satisfaction:
Low salary Good leadership
Low insurance Good relationship with

managers
Poor working conditions
Recognitions
Impossibility of progress
Advancements
Personal progress
When these factors are
optimal, job When these factors are optimal, job
dissatisafaction will be dissatisafaction will increase.
eliminated. Still, these
factors are not increased
with job satisfaction.
Figure 2. Model of Job Satisfaction (Courtesy of J.Field)
50
Employees’ satisfaction has three basic effects:
Satisfaction and productivity. Even though it is logical to assume that the correlation
between satisfaction and productivity is positive, that relationship is not as strong as it
was once thought to be. The coefficient of the correlation in all research is around 0.17.
There are several reasons why this relationship is not more direct and stronger. The first
one is that it is possible that other factors influence productivity and not just the
satisfaction of the worker. There are technologies where the worker cannot influence
productivity since the technological process is determining the speed of work. In that
case, satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the worker can have little influence on productivity.
A possible explanation for a weak correlation between satisfaction and productivity of
workers is the cause and effect relationship between these two phenomena. Some research
show that the increase in productivity is the cause and not the effect of the satisfaction of
workers. An increase in productivity causes enhancement of performances and this
enhancement is the reward which leads to an increase in their pleasure. Finally, lately it
is shown that productivity is only one aspect of enhancing performances under the
influence of workers. A satisfied worker will not only be productive but will also create
a better working atmosphere and they will have a positive influence on the work of other
colleagues.
Absence from work. Satisfied workers will be less absent from work. This hypothesis is
also confirmed by empirical research, nonetheless, the (negative) correlation coefficient
is not as strong as it was expected. The probable cause of a weaker connection between
dissatisfied employees and their absence from work is that that decision is influenced by
other factors. Sometimes, a highly satisfied worker will be absent from work. On the other
hand, there are more factors which compel dissatisfied workers to come to work – fear of
losing their job, obligations to colleagues at work or to their client etc.
Fluctuation. It is ascertained that satisfied workers will be less absent from work than
dissatisfied workers which seems like common sense. The rate of fluctuation in
enterprises with a high dissatisfaction of employees is greater than in those with a lower
rate of dissatisfied workers. Still, there are many variables which can influence that
relationship. A dissatisfied worker may keep his job since they have no other possibilities.
This means that the correlation between satisfaction and fluctuation of employees is
51
influenced by general economic conditions as well as the unemployment rate in an
economy. It is ascertained that the tendency to quit a job is also influenced by general
satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the employee with their life. That influence is opposite
to the ones which could be assumed at first glance. Workers who are generally satisfied
with their lives quit their jobs with more ease (they are not satisfied with their job) than
the ones who are not satisfied with both their personal lives and their job.
Motivation
People, their needs, motivation and satisfaction are becoming the center of attentions of
managing human resources since it has been realized that human capital represents the
main tool of competitive capabilities and advantages in the global marketplace. The needs
of an individual and factors considered to be motivational for them are the object of
intensive research and analysis which resulted in establishing many motivation theories.
The complexity of an individual excludes accepting one motivational theory as universal
meaning that one motivational theory postulates a unique way in motivating people of all
kinds and in all types of organizations regardless of the environment in which they are. A
man is a complex psychological system who demands many instruments in increasing
motivation.
It is necessary to know the complexity of individuals as well as their surroundings. The

effect of human resource management should be seen as a process in which each and
every activity and function has a major role in building a successful and healthy company
with the basis in a satisfied and efficient employee. Managers must represent the
relationship between people and enterprises and they must perform their function within
the management of human resources in order to achieve the integrity of the system, the
satisfaction of people and goals of the enterprise. One of the basic tasks of managing
human resources within a company is defining policy goals and reward systems and the
condition is knowing and understanding human motivation.
52
The reward system and motivation must not only depend on the individual’s behavior and
position of the manager but it must be part of the business and development policies,
established rules and norms. Motivational system of the enterprise must secure three types
of behavior important for the functioning of the organization and its development:
1. It is necessary to attract people to the system and they must stay within
it
2. Employees must perform given tasks and obligations in a satisfying
manner
3. Innovative and creative activities must be developed in order to
accomplish goals of the development of the organization
In order for a motivational system to secure the earlier mentioned three types of behavior,
it is necessary to combine financial and non-financial motivational factors in order to
satisfy different human needs.
53
Figure 3: Model of interaction of motivation, development and systematic planning in the
company Deloitte (by courtesy of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Croatia
Material Compensation
Adequate material compensation makes the foundation on which a wider structure of

motivational stimuli should be built upon in order to enhance the total motivational
potential and attractiveness of work situations. Material compensations are necessary but
not the only condition for developing a wide motivational foundation of diverse behavior
within the enterprise. Non-material compensation is becoming ever more important in
developed economic systems while in ours it seems that salary is on top of motivational
factors. The reason for that is different economic conditions, culture, heritage etc.
54
There are certain rules which must be followed by managers when creating concepts of
motivation systems:
1. An emphasis must be put on team work, rewarding and total organizational

success
2. Distributing bonuses must be simple, and
3. Salaries of managers must be very high but also the first to be reduced if
there are unfavorable business results
It is especially important to take into consideration the fact that employees must trust the
entire compensation system and its fairness. Good interpersonal relationships must be
rewarded with attractive employee benefits and increase in salary since motivation is
closely tied to earnings. In order to attract new workers, the employer must check if his
payroll list is higher than the one offered by his competition. The policy of benefits and
salary must promote good interpersonal relationships.
A healthy policy entails paying employees according to merit, narrowly connecting his
salary with the results of the work they have done. For every part added to the salary with
the goal of encouraging employees’ successes and certain forms of individual behavior,
there must be a clear foundation and criteria in order to motivate certain behavior. In order
for the system of stimulation to have certain effects, it has to be: simple, detailed, feasible,
measurable and fair. Besides the salary employees get as compensation for their work,
other benefits are also significant because they enhance usefulness which employees get
from total benefits (car, insurance, assistance in resolving residential issues etc.).
Enterprises should know how to recognize what they want to achieve with certain benefits
and understand motivation characteristics of how every benefit affects the worker.
Reward systems can be individual (based on complexity of the job and working
conditions, success, bonuses, provisions and progress) and on enterprise levels (the
employee’s share in the success of the enterprise, employees ownership of company
shares, team and group bonuses).
The premise of efficiently evaluating work effects demands a quality analysis of the job
description and communication between employees and management. Employees often
55
connect development with promotion. Low organization hierarchies, which are ever
present in organizations because of the tendency to decentralize, cannot ensure promotion
and advancement of employees. Hence, reward strategies and payroll structure must be
based upon encouraging individuals to seek promotion in their professional and personal
development instead of promotion in the hierarchy towards higher salaries.
Non-material Compensation
The motivational system of employees with material compensation must encompass also
compensation which is non-material in character since the goal is to satify different
human needs. The more needs the system satifies, the more it is efficient in achieveing
organizational goals. Since needs are not only material but also social and psychological
in nature (the need to grow and develop, to receive acknowledgment for their abilities,
status, cooperation, social contacts, security etc.) it is necessary to supplement the system
of material stimulation with mechanisms which point to the significance of each and every
individual for the organization and their individual contribution.
Knowledge and creativity, instead of effectiveness and productivity in a classical sense,

become the foundation for efficiency and successfulness of a modern organization.
Hence, it is logical to find new ways for motivating employees. The motivational basis is
enlarged with group systems of rewarding which, besides material compensation, include
more other factors of motivation such as participation in setting goals and making
decision, autonomy and accountability, job design, collaboration, flexible working hours,
etc.
56
Mobbing at job and mental health
Stress in the workplace is a growing problem in the world, and mobbing, as well as the
emergence of psychological abuse employees, is one of the worst forms of work stress,
which can leave lasting effects on mental and physical health of the individual. Hostile
behavior is of long duration and therefore leads to mental, psychosomatic and social
suffering. Bad combination of economic rationalization, increasing the competitiveness
of health workers, as amended dynamics of work, and "macho" management style, in
health care, create the culture of behavior in which mobbing "blooms" (1).
Modern society is characterized by a number of changes. There is a growing use of

information and communication technologies. There is a pronounced increase in service
sector, office tasks, work with information and customers, teamwork, teleworking and
flexible business. There is a significant change in age, gender and educational structure
of the labor force and the security of employment, and the economy becomes more global
(2). Strong competition in the market, organizational changes (privatization, mergers,
restructuring, informatization), economic crisis, so-called new economy, job insecurity
and the expectation of flexibility of employees led to an increase in the frequency of
"mobbing".
Moral harassment became more apparent than ever. Employers are forced to analyze
every problem that has negative consequences for productivity and production costs
(3). Although many workers want to work and when they dont work they cant provide
funds for life, some psychosocial characteristics of work in modern society make the job
all non-preferred alternative, and early retirement are more and more desirable.
57
Meaning and terminology
Mobbing can be defined as moral harassment in the workplace. There are many terms
that tries to translate mobbing: psychological abuse, physical abuse, psychological
terrorism, moral harassment and the like.
The term mobbing or psychological harassment in the workplace is a form of aggressive

emotional abuse directed at the personality of the victim wich is destroying the model of
development of posttraumatic stress disorder and affects her emotional environment,
especially the family (4). This is not the type of conflict whose solution can lead to open
space to positive changes. On the contrary, mobbing is an expression of negative energy
that comes from the deliberate failure to resolve everyday conflicts and the deliberate
maintenance of a climate of misunderstanding. Communication in such environment
becomes hostile, immoral and unethical. It is one or more persons negatively directed at
the victim which is a predetermined function of helplessness and defenselessness (5).
Prevalance and history of mobbing
The first scientist who has begun to investigate this phenomenon was a German
psychologist Heinz Leymann (5). He first used the term "mobbing" for certain behaviors
in the workplace, determine its characteristics, ž effects, and founded a clinic to help the
victims.
The word mobbing, Leymann borrowed from etiology Konrad Lorenz who called with
this word behavior of some species of animals teaming up against one of its members,
attacked him and expelled from the community, leading him sometimes to death. Similar
to the behavior of people in the working environment, Leymann used the same name.
58
Mobbing victims and tipes
Mobbing victims
The most frequent targets for "mobber" are people that some of their positive qualities
provoke envy. These are mostly people who love their work, they focus on it, enthusiasts
that have high achievement, volunteer work or taking extra jobs, or have high ethical
standards. For example, promoters for human rights and human dignity. These are those
who do not enjoy the destructiveness of the groups, which can not confront, not in favor
of comparison, belonging to different religious or cultural affiliations. Those who do not
have the "background" and are not politically engaged. Independent people who look
good and popular in society. When they find themselves at the wrong time in the wrong
place, and become vulnerable in some way (eg. have to make the mortgage payments,
have family responsibilities, etc.), they easily become targets for mobber (6).
Those people receive messages such as "not good enough", and feel incompetent and can
not defend themselves when they complained but suffer low self-esteem and low self-
confidence, no inner strength and emotional maturity (5).
Mobbing significantly affects all activities, all age groups, both men and
women. However, women are still slightly more risky groups and primary targets of
harassment. Serious studies have shown that women's risk of being victims of mobbing
are 75% higher than for men (7). Sex differences in mobbing are partly a result of
stereotypical existing divisions male-female role in social relations (8).
Canadian research has found that men suffer more physical violence, and women
psychological. Because men have more physical injuries resulting from violence (66%
versus 35%), women in most cases, state mental health problems (91%), while men cited
less often (54%).
In BiH, the first research on mobbing was conducted in November 2002 in Sarajevo,
among the urban population. According to the results of this study of 15.4% to 53.4% of
the total number of respondents experienced some form of mobbing. The sample
consisted of 500 respondents, of which 243 (49%) were women and 257 (51%) men
(9). More women (48.1%) complained of the psychological problems caused by the work
59
they are doing, but the more men (9.8%) than women (5.2%) went on sick leave because
of problems at work. This information is different from other studies, which suggest that
women are more absent from work because of a condition resulting from violence in the
workplace (10). That's according to the results of a representative randomized studies
conducted by Leymann (6).
Types of Mobbing
Mentally mobbing is a particular form of behavior in the workplace in which one person
or group of people systematically humiliating and psychologically abusing another
person. Mockery, slander, threats, taking out the bad reviews on mode, the speed of
fulfilling their tasks, intellectual capacity, reducing wages, relocation to lower workplace
threaten to honor, reputation, integrity and human dignity of vulnerable people who often
do not know how to recognize what is happening and feel helpless, oppressed and
miserable.
Two types of mobbing:
1. Horizontal - which takes place between workers who are in the same position in
the hierarchy.
2. Vertical - that takes place between the supervisor and one or more subordinate
workers.
Mobbing often arises from conflicts between co-workers who start bad mutual
relations. Original conflict is forgotten, and the hostility remains. Repressed aggression
turns into terrorizing the victim that begins to feel inferior and lose his dignity. Comes to
self-blame of the victims and loneliness. Victims usually can not tell what's going on
because they are ashamed and afraid that others would not believe.
In the workplace, victim fails to get a word in, they kept interrupting his/her speech. They
are ignored like non-existent. They are excluded from social life at work. The most
common discomfort is that colleagues interrupt the conversation when the victim enters
the room. The victim is moved to an office away from the study of other colleagues. Gets
60
only irrelevant and meaningless tasks and work obligations that are below their
professional level or gave her a task that can not be resolved, or even to acquire new
responsibilities. Her work has been criticized, even if it was professionally done.
The victim is blamed for the failures that did not happen. The victim dont get important
information. He/she is constantly exposed to ridicule and jokes about the speech, posture,
walking, dressing, private life, nationality, gender, race and the like. In its culmination,
mobbing also include threats of physical assault, sexual harassment or terrorizing with
phone calls.
Although the word mobbing is primarily psychological intimidation means it can

sometimes involve physical aggression. Physical violence in the workplace is extremely
rare, and this term is mainly related to the behavior of children in school whose behavior
including aggressive acts.
Sexual harassment is one of the ways of mobbing, and it is defined as any form of
unwanted verbal, non-verbal and physical conduct of a sexual nature, any attempt to
influence sexual person to person, with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a
person, who is troubled, confused and experiencing the unpleasanty.
All behavior can be directed from man to woman, woman to man, woman to woman, man
to man, between superiors to subordinates. Implemented as an abuse of power or control,
or substitute something for something (sex as a condition), while insisting on the
submission and obedience. For example, offering a promotion to a higher level, a higher
salary or remuneration, or threats and intimidation depending on whether they accept the
sexual advances or not. Another way is to establish a hostile abuse sexualized
environment in the work area, where repeated unpleasant actions, words and behavior of
a sexual nature, jokes, gestures, unwanted touching, views, casual comments, unwanted
comments of one's appearance, behavior and dress, lack of respect, over-friendly
behavior, "beyond the part of the job".
61
Role in Mobbing process and the risk of mobbing by occupation
The risk of violence is higher in some professions. Although it was believed that violence
is justified only in jobs that are traditionally for male, such as prison guards and police
officers, it is also in the jobs that are traditionally dor female, because women are more
often employed in a range of sectors that actually have very high risk, for example, money
counters, cashier, education, care, work with mental patients, with potentially dangerous
persons, eg. in the bars... especially at risk are groups that are considered to be a higher
material status than women (11).
The consequences of mobbing
The most common consequence of mobbing is the burnout syndrome, reactive

depression, reactive psychotic paranoid type and suicide as a tragic consequence, and
31% of female victims develop post-traumatic stress disorder (12).
Due to the accumulation of negative emotions, mobbing the exposed person causes
different psychological and psychosomatic disorders (13). Stress in the workplace is
present in almost every third employee of the European Union (EU) and 28% or 41.2
million employees, of which more are women than men. This problem causes the annual
loss of a million working days and at least 20 billion euros, and the "culprit" for the 5
million accidents at work. Due to stress at work in the EU came to pass 48 000 executed
and nearly half a million attempted suicide (14).
Stress leads employees to burnout syndrome and/or experience of mobbing, dropping

their working capacity, an increase in morbidity and absenteeism, changing the index of
their ability to work, or on the other hand, the quality of service and profitability are
reduced (15). There is a significant correlation between mobbing and sick leave
(16). Mobbing and indirect traumatization at work are disorders that can occur to all
people who are engaged in a helping profession.
62
Theoretical models of Mobbing at work
The term mobbing was derived from the English language, from the noun mob - which
means scum, rabble, or from the verb ''to cell''1 - which means attack from the
crowd. Otherwise, this word in the English terminology came thanks to the research of
Konrad Lorenz, who dealt with the psychology of animal behavior. Specifically, in this
study it is described the behavior of some animals that unite against one member, attacked
him and forced out of the community, and sometimes it leads to death2. In bosnian
language there is no adequate translation of the word mobbing, and we use untranslated
word, which in our language has the following meaning: intimidation, social degradation,
destruction of personal dignity, exclusion from the social environment. 3 The study was
started mobbing the thirties of the last century, and is linked to the Swedish
psychotherapist Heinz Lojman, who described characters od this phenomenon and the
consequences that it has on the health of a person who is a victim of mobbing. In addition,
thanks to the activities of the physiotherapist, in eighties, it is founded the first clinic to
help the victims of mobbing.4
Today, in theory, there are several definitions of this term. Among the most common
definitions of mobbing is as follows:
Mobbing is a specific form of behavior in the workplace in which one or more persons
systematically and psychologically abuse and humiliate another person, endangering its
reputation, human dignity and integrity, and with the aim of eliminating him from the job.
1
In addition to the term 'mobbing', which is used in Sweden, Germany and Italy (bullying), in foreign
literature are present other terms for the appointment of this phenomenon, such as: '' moral harassment
'(moral harassment, harcèlement morale ), which is used in France: '' violence or aggression in the
workplace '(workplace violence or aggression), as well as'' bullying '' (workplace bullying), which are used
in the US and the UK. They are present even terms: '' abuse of labor '(work abuse) and' victimization at
work '' (victimization at work), as well as the '' psychological terror and harassment '' (psychological terror
or harassment, violenza Psicologico). See Sasa Gajin, Tanja Drobnjak, Violeta Kocic - Mitaček, the Model
Law on Prevention of Harassment at Work, Belgrade, 2008, p. 8th
2
See: http://sr.wikipedia.org/
3
See: See Illustrated Oxford English Dictionary, Novi Sad, 2002, p. 523rd
4
See: Bullying and how to prevent it - a manual for regional commissioner of the United branch unions ''
independence '', p. 5;
63
From this definition, we can conclude that mobbing has the following theoretical
aspects and essential features:
1. Psychological abuse and humiliation of a person in the workplace, by one or more

persons. For this reason, mobbing in practice is often defined as a terror of the one
group over the individual. Mobbing has similarities with the term '' harassment'',
but it is a much broader concept. This is because the mobbing beside
psychological abuse has far-reaching consequences for the health and social status
of the employee. On the other hand, the occurrence of mobbing is specific in that
it refers exclusively to the behavior in the workplace.
2. Child abuse and humiliation is done continuously over a longer period of
time. Theorists have a perception that the behavior that leads to mobbing should
last at least six months and that the employee is subjected to abuse and humiliation
at the workplace at least once a week.
3. This behavior leads to a violation of the dignity of the employee, as well as to
create a hostile work environment. So, mobbing results in a violation of basic
human values, such as reputation, honor and dignity. On the other hand, mobbing
disrupts interpersonal relationships with the employer. This is because employees
who are not victims of mobbing are afraid not to find themselves in the same
situation, so often do not provide support to the victims of mobbing.
4. The ultimate goal of this behavior is the termination of employment of an
employee, on his own initiative or his fault. It continues to have consequences for
the mental and physical health, material and social status of the employee. For this
reason, mobbing observation are not wrong only from a legal, but also from a
social, medical and psychological-psychiatric point of view.
Although the basic features of this phenomenon outrages upon personal dignity of the
employee, mobbing should be distinguished from sexual harassment in the
workplace. This is because sexual harassment has the effect of violating the dignity in the
sphere of sexual life, while in the case of mobbing, psychological abuse and
intimidation. Mobbing is different from discrimination in the workplace, because their
grounds are different. Specifically, and discrimination as one of the consequences of a
violation of the dignity of the employee, but it is done for some of the inherent properties
64
(eg, disability, ethnicity, gender, etc.), or acquired properties (belonging to a political
party, trade union membership, and the like.), which has no impact on performance.
Bullying should be distinguished from the term Mobbing, which is the origin of the
English word bull, meaning abuse, torment. Bullying is a phenomenon that involves
abuse in the school. On the other hand, this phenomenon except mental harashment
includes physical abuse by a group of students.
Previous empirical studies about relationship between Mobbing and the

working conditions
Heinz Leimann in Sweden conducted so far the most valuable study which collected data
from interviews where the main topic was Mobbing. A sample of the employed
population over which it was carried this testing included 2,400 people. On the basis of
this study it has been obtained the following data:
Statistics show that 3.5 percent of employed people are victims of mobbing. This means
that from 1,186,103 of working men and women in Serbia (information taken from the
website of Serbian Chamber of Commerce) 41,514 belong to the victims of mobbing if
we assume that the percentage of victims are the same as in Sweden.
If it is assumed that the average lifespan od work is 30 years, we can say that the risk of
one employee on the individual level become a victim of mobbing is around 25%, or, one
in four employees will be a victim of mobbing for at least six months during their working
life.
Poles: Men (45%) and women (55%) are roughly equally represented as victims of
mobbing. As for the question of who is mobbing who?, the study showed that 76% male
victims were attacked by other males while only 3% were attacked by women. Only 21%
of men were attacked by both sexes. As for the women, 40% were attacked by other
women, 30% were attacked by men and the remaining 30% of women were attacked by
both sexes. The reason why men generally attack the other men and women are mostly
65
abused by other women is probably due to the working environment because they are
usually poles workplaces that run separately.
Age: Most victims of mobbing fall into in a group which has 21 to 40 years. There are
noticeable differences in the sexes when it comes to year.
Number of Moberly: One-third of the victims was attacked by a Moberly. About 40%
were attacked by two to four people. Whole department that harass a person is very
rare. Leymann notes that future research should focus on a group of people in the same
class with the victim in the workplace but does not participate in the mobbing because
they are the ones who have the potential to stop the process.
Long-term effects: a surprisingly large number of victims of mobbing later developed a

serious mental illness or committed suicide, and the study shows the change of ten to
twenty percent. 80% of patients on mobbing clinic is thinking about suicide, while 25%
previously had one or more suicide attempts.
Comparing with other countries: Not many countries conducted a serious investigation,
but some of them who did are Germany, Austria and Finland. Compared with Sweden,
other states had higher total percentage of victims of mobbing. Is the percentage higher
or lower in Serbia, still needs to be discovered. The following graph the figures obtained
from the most recent research shows that the percentage of mobbing victims is far greater
than the Leymannovo study found.
Literature review and orgaziyational commitment
In the organizational psychology discussion, the concept of organizational commitment

is being an expanding interest since 1960s (Wasti, 2005:291, Becker, 1960:32, Gul,
2002:32). In studies on organizational commitment, it is determined that organizational
commitment correlates with job satisfaction (Witt & Wilson, 1989:268, Chen, 2006:274),
organizational adaptability and turnover (Angle & Perry, 1981:3), job scope and
challenge, role clarity and freedom from conflicts, organizational dependability or
concern for the workers, participation in decision making (Meyer & Allen, 1988:196),
66
absenteeism (Cohen, 1991:253), and efficiency of the organization in general (Meyer and
Herscovitch, 2001:299). Although the increase of attention given to the organizational
commitment, there is still plenty of collisions about what commitment is, where it is
directed, how it develops, and how it affects behavior. In addition, the commitment takes
various forms including commitment to organizations, unions, occupations and
professions, team and leaders, goals and personal careers (Meyer and Herscovitch,
2001:300). According to Oliver (1990; 19), research on organizational commitment has
produced various viewpoints to the concept and also overmuch definitions of the
phenomenon.
Although organizational commitment has been conceptualized in various ways, in the

literature of organizational commitment, it is described as an “affected attachment”
characterized by a sharing of values, to be desirous to keep membership, a willingness to
exert effort on behalf of the organization (Meyer and Allen, 1988:196).
The variety of definitions on organizational commitment causes confusion in categorized

of the concept (Gul, 2002:38). For instance, Buchanan (1974:533) has used three
measures, “identification”, “involvement” and “loyalty”, in order to measure the
commitment.
Organizational commitment has been investigated under two subscales, “value

commitment” and “commitment to stay in the organization” by Angle and Perry (1981,
1); three subscales, “justification”, “identification” and “internalization” by O’Reilly and
Chatman (Seymen, 2008), and three subscales “moral commitment”, “calculative
commitment” and “alienative commitment” (Penley and Gould, 1988:46-47).
A three-component model involving “affective”, continuance” and “normative”

approaches has been developed in order to conceptualization of organizational
commitment has been developed to define organizational commitment as a psychological
case that binding the person to the organization by Allen and Meyer (1990; 3-4).
Furthermore, this model developed by Meyer and Allen has been commonly used in other
studies in last 20 years (Dawley et al., 2005:512, Tengilimoğlu, Mansur, 2009:72).
According to Meyer and Allen, “affective commitment” is concerned with employees’

attachment to, identification with and involvement in, the organization (Meyer et al.,
67
1998; 32, Seymen, 2008). According to authors, affective commitment to the organization
could be characterized by a sharing the values, a desire to maintain membership and
working without any expectations for the benefit of the organization (Meyer and Allen,
1988:196). In consequence of the affective commitment, employees want to maintain
their memberships in the organization (Dawley et al., 2005:513).
“Continuance commitment” is interested employees to be aware of the high costs of

leaving by employees (Meyer and Herscovitch, 2001:304, Meyer et al., 1998:32). In other
words, it is to keep working because of the financial damage by demitting (Seymen,
2008).
Once and for all, “normative commitment” is the feeling of obligation to work and loyalty
to the organization (Dawley et al., 2005; 513). This feeling of obligation can be thought
as the result of familial or cultural pressures (Dawley et al., 2005:513, Seymen, 2008).
The employees, having high degree of normative commitment, feel that they ought to
continue their jobs in the organization (Dawley et al., 2005:513).
In this study, the organizational commitment model of Allen and Mayer, as stated above,
is used to specify the commitment dimensions, because this model is the most
comprehensive model including other alternative models.
Effects of Mobbing on Individual, Organizational and the Society
The mobbing may be directly verbal or physical attacks to the victim, but it also may be
subtle actions such as excluding or isolating the victim from his/her work group.
According to organizational measures, acts of mobbing such as taking away
responsibilities or devaluating one’s work and efforts, social isolation and exclusion,
and exposure to the teasing, insulting remarks, and ridicule are the most common
behaviors (Zapf and Einarsen, 2001:370).
When the effects of mobbing to the organization are being investigated, it is seen that
the mobbing causes higher absenteeism, higher intent to leave the organization, higher
turnover, and earlier retirements (Salin, 2001:426, Leymann, 1996:174). Additionally, it
68
is determined the mobbing has negative effects on performance of employees (Kırel,
2007) and organizational commitment (Demirgil, 2008:74).
In the studies, it is seen that the mobbing has negative influences on psychological and
physical health of the victim, and also efficiency of other employees (Mikkelsen &
Einarsen, 2001:394). In fact, the rises in negligence, staff turnover, and cases of sick
leave have related to mobbing in the workplace (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2001; 394).
Furthermore, it causes several troubles in both job satisfaction and health of victim
(Salin, 2001:426).
The unfriendly behaviors in work place have not been completely negative structure when
they have started to become apparent. They were formed by quite normal interactive
behaviors. However, if they keep go on frequently and for a long time, their concept and
meaning has changed. So, the mobbing has to be set apart from conflicts in the
organization. According to Leymann, these all negative behaviors should be investigated
in five categories depending on the effects they have on the victim (Leymann, 1996:170).
1. Effects on the victims’ possibilities to communicate adequately (no occasion to

communicate by the management; verbal attack regarding work tasks; verbal
threats; verbal activities to reject victim etc.).
2. Effects on the victims’ possibilities to maintain social contacts (colleagues do not
talk to victim or forbidden to contact with them by isolating victim).
3. Effects on the victims’ possibilities to maintain their personal reputation
(gossiping about victim; others ridicule victim; making fun of victim’s
inadequacy).
4. Effects on the victims’ occupational situation (do not give any works to victim or
given unnecessary tasks).
5. Effects on victims’ physical health (given very dangerous work tasks to victim,
victim is threatened or attacked physically, etc.).
Studies connected to the mobbing point out that many victims of mobbing suffer from
several psychological stresses such as anxiety, depression, irritability and self-hate. The
majority of victims of mobbing exhibit various psychosomatic symptoms. In addition, the
69
mobbing on victims has also negative effects on other employees in the work
environment. In this way, the mobbing is a significant factor of psychological stress
(Mikkelsen and Einarsen, 2001:394).
70
CONCLUSION
At the end it is important to prove that we have proven all our hypotheses and research
questions. The primary purpose of this study was to explore the amount of actual negative
social support received and perceived overprotection by employed and unemployed
adults with visual impairments. The results demonstrated that the employed participants
reported conflictual exchanges with their social networks significantly less often and felt
less overprotected by the people around them than did the unemployed participants. It
may be that the social, economic, and psychological benefits of employment ease or
preempt negative supports by social networks; it is also possible that being in a situation
in which there is less conflict and fewer overprotective attitudes exhibited by social
networks creates a more conducive environment for seeking and maintaining
employment. Being exposed to fewer negative types of support may provide a safer and
more encouraging environment for individuals to seek and maintain employment, as was
found in past research (Bolton, 1983; Crudden, 2002; Crudden & McBroom, 1999;
Kaplan, 1990; McShane & Karp, 1993; Moore, 1984; Roessler & Bolton, 1985; Roy et
al., 1998).
With regard to differences in the positive social support that the participants received, the
results showed that the employed participants had higher levels of perceived support from
friends, perhaps because being employed increases one's social circle. However, the
finding underscores the importance and benefits of being employed, since high levels of
perceived support have been found to have beneficial effects on well-being (Reinhardt,
2001).
71
REFERENCES
Books
1. Abu-Omar K, Rutten A, Robine JM. Self-rated health and physical activity in the
European Union. Soz Praventivmed 2004;49(4):235–42.
2. Adam TC, Epel ES. Stress, eating and the reward system. Physiol Behav
2007;91(4):449–58.
3. An R, Liu J. Local labor market fluctuations and physical activity among adults
in the United States 1990-2009. Int Schol Res Network Public Health 2012; pp.
1–7.
4. APA (2007). APA dictionary of psychology: Washington DC: American
psychological Association.
5. Bauman A, Bull F. Physical Activity: Correlates and Interventions. School of
Sports and Exercise Science, Lougborough University 2007. pp. 1–44.
6. Boström B, Nyqvist K. Objective and Background of Questions in the National
Public Health Survey. Swedish National Institute of Public Health,
Sweden:2010:2. pp. 1–75.
7. Charilaou M, Karela M, Constantinou M, Price S. Relationship between physical
activity and type of smoking behaviour among adolescents and young adults in
Cyprus. Nicotine Tob Res 2009;11(8):969–76.
8. Charles KK, DeCicca. Local labor market fluctuations and health: is there a
connection and for whom? J Health Econ 2008;27(6):1532–50.
9. Deb P, Gallo WT, Ayyagari P, Fletcher JM, Sindelar JL. The effect of job loss on
overweight and drinking. J Econ 2011;30: 317–27.
10. Emmons KM, Barbeau EM, Gutheil CS, Stryker JE, Stoddard AM. Social
influences, social context, and health behaviours among working-class, multi-
ethnic adults. Health Educa Behav 2007;34(2):315–34.
11. Falba T, Teng HM, Sindelar JL, Gallo WT. The effect of involuntary job loss on
smoking intensity and relapse. Addiction 2005;100(9):1330–9.
12. Gävle ABF. Landets högsta arbetslöshet och lägsta utbildning.
Arbetsformedlingen 2012; pp. 1–4.
72
13. Gough M. A couple-level analysis of unemployment and health behaviors.
Presented at the Conference of the Population Association of America; 2013; New
Orleans, LA, pp. 1–3.
14. Henkel D. Unemployment and substance use: a review of the literature (1920-
2010). Curr Drug Abuse Rev 2011;4(1):4–27.
15. Herrman H., Saxena S., & Moodie R. (Eds.). (2005). Promoting Mental Health.
Geneva,SW: World Health Organization
16. Hyytinen A, Lahtonen J. The effect of physical activity on long- term income. Soc
Sci Med 2013;96:129–37.
17. Jankovic J, Janevic T, von dem Knesebeck O. Socioeconomic inequalities, health
damaging behaviour, and self-perceived health in Serbia: a cross-sectional study.
Croat Med J 2012; 53(3):254–62.
18. Jylhä M. What is self-rated health and why does it predict mortality? Towards a
unified conceptual model. Soc Sci Med 2009;69(3):307–16.
19. Kan M. How does unemployment affect health-related behaviour of Japanese
men: a panel data analysis? School of Economics, University of Hyogo, 2010. pp.
1–28.
20. Kapuvary V. Psychological effects of economic recession and unemployment.
Eur J Ment Health 2011;6:83–93.
21. Ker J, Sallis JF, Saelens BE, Cain KL, Conway TL, Frank LD, et al. Outdor
physical activity and self-rated health in older adults living in two regions of the
US. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2012;9:89.
22. Keyes L. M., & Michalec B. (2009) Viewing Mental Health from the Complete
State Paradigm. In Scheid T., & Brown T. (Eds.). A Handbook for the Study of
Mental Health Second Edition Social Contexts, Theories, and Systems. (pp.125-
135) New York,NY: Cambridge University Press
23. LaMonte MJ, A insworth BE. Quantifying energy expenditure and physical
activity in the context of dose response. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001;33(Suppl
6):S370–8.
24. Lavikainen J., Lahtinen E., & Lehtinen V. (2000). Public health approach on
mental health in Europe. Helsinki, National Research and Development Centre
for Welfare and Health, STAKES Ministry of Social Affairs and Health.
73
25. Lindström M, Hanson BS, Östergren PO. Socioeconomic differences in leisure-
time physical activity: the role of social participation and social capital in shaping
health related behaviours. Soc Sci Med 2001;52(3):441–51.
26. Ludwig DS, Pollack HA. Obesity and the economy from crisis to opportunity.
JAMA 2009;301(5):533–5.
27. Lundström S, Särndal C. Calibration as a standard method for treatment of
nonresponse. J Off Stat Stockholm 1999;15:305–28.
28. Lunn P. Fair Play? Sport and Social Disadvantage in Ireland. Dublin: Economical
and Social Research Institute, 2007. pp. 1–95.
29. Marcus J. Does Job Loss Make You Gain Weight? SOE Papers on
Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research. Berlin, Germany: Ministry of Health,
Labour and Welfare, 2002. pp. 1–26. No.432.
30. McInnes MM, Shinogle JA. Physical Activity: Economic and Policy Factors.
National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) working paper. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 2009. pp. 1–42.
31. Melin R, Fugl-Meyer KS, Fugl-Meyer AR. Life satisfaction in 18- to 64-year-old
Swedes in relation to education, employment situation, health and physical
activity. J Rehabil Med 2003; 35(2):84–90.
32. Miilunpalo S, Vuori I, Oja P, Pasanen M, Urponen H. Self-rated health status
as a health measure: the predictive value of self-reported health status on the use
of physician services and on mortality in the working-age population. J Clin
Epidemiol 1997;50(5):517–28.
33. Montgomery S, Cook D, Bartley M, Wadsworth M. Unemployment, cigarette
smoking, alcohol consumption and body weight in young British men. Eur J
Public Health 2002;8:21–7.
34. Nicholson S, Simon K. How did the recession affect health and related activities
of Americans? 2010. Available at: http://www. unc.edu/the/archives/simon.pdf
35. OECD. Employment Outlook 2010: Moving Beyond the Jobs Crisis. Paris,
France: OECD, 2010.
36. Owen N, Humpel N, Leslie E, Bauman A, Sallis JF. Understanding environmental
influences on walking: review and research agenda. Am J Prev Med
2004;27(1):67–76.
74
37. Papathanasiou G, Papandreou M, Galanos A, Kortianou E, Tsepis E, Kalfakakou
V, et al. Smoking and physical activity interrelations in health science students. Is
smoking a ssociated with physical inactivity in young adults? Hellenic J Cardiol
2012;53(1):17–25.
38. Resnick B, Orwig D, Magaziner J, Wynne C. The effect of social support on
exercise behavior in older adults. Clin Nurs Res 2002;11(1):52–70.
39. Roshannei-Moghaddam B, Katon WJ, Russo J. The longitudinal effects of
depression on physical activity. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2009;31(4):306–15.
40. Ruhm CJ. Are recessions good for your health? Q J Econ 2000;15:617–650.
41. Ruhm CJ. Healthy living in hard times. J Health Econ 2005;24:341–63.
42. Sallis JF, Bowles HR, Bauman A, Ainsworth BE, Bull FC, Craig CL, et al.
Neighborhood environments and physical activity among adults in 11 countries.
Am J Prev Med 2009;36(6):484–90.
43. Samhälsmedicin Gävleborg. Gävleborg Folkhälsolägat (In Swedish) 2010.
44. Särndal CE, Lundström S. Estimation in Surveys with Nonresponse. Chichester,
England: Wiley, 2005. pp. 1–195.
45. Scheid T., & Brown T. (Eds.). (2009). A Handbook for the Study of Mental Health
Second Edition Social Contexts, Theories, and Systems. New York,NY:
Cambridge University Press
46. Schunck R, Rogge BG. Unemployment and its association with health-relevant
actions investigating the role of the time perspective with German census data. Int
J Public Health 2010;55(4):271–8.
47. SPSS version 20. North Carolina: SPSS Institute, 2012.
48. Statistics Sweden. Health on Equal Terms. Survey 2010. County: Gävleborg
County Council Technical Report (In Swedish), 2010. pp. 1–61.
49. Sullivan DG, von Wachter T. Job displacement and mortality: an analysis using
administrative data. Q J Econ 2009; 124(3):1265–306.
50. Trost S, Owen N, Bauman AE, Sallis JF, Brown W. Correlates of adult
participation in physical activity: review and update. Med Sci Sports Exerc
2002;34(12):1996–2001.
75
51. van Oort FV, van Lenthe FJ, Mackenbach JP. Coocurrence of lifestyle risk factors
and the explanation of education inequalities in mortality: results from the
GLOBE study. Prev Med 2004;39(6):1126–34.
52. Wadsworthx ME. Changing social factors and their long-term implications for
health. Br Med Bull 1997;53(1):198–209.
53. Wu S, Wang R, Zhao Y, Ma X, Wu M, Yan X, et al. The relationship between
self-rated health and objective health status: a population-based study. BMC
Public Health 2013;13:320.
Internet sources
1. World Health Organisation. (2014). Mental Health: A State of Well-being.

Retrieved from http://www.who.int/features/factfiles/mental_health/en/
76
APPENDIX
Questionar
Poštovani,
Kandidatkinja za magistarski rad sa odsjeka za Umjetnost i Drušvene Nauke
Internacionalnog Univerziteta u Sarajevu provodi opsežno istraživanje utjecaja ne/zaposlenosti na
dobrostanje osoba u Novom Pazaru.
Vaše nam je iskustvo i mišljenje dragocjeno i svojim biste nam sudjelovanjem pomogli u
prikupljanju vrijednih podataka. Stoga Vas molimo da što iskrenije odgovorite na sljedeća pitanja.
Istraživanje je anonimno, a podaci će biti korišteni isključivo u znanstvene svrhe.
Unaprijed Vam zahvaljujemo na suradnji!
Pol______________
Koliko imate godina?_______________
Bracni status?_______________
Koliko dugo ste zaposleni/nezaposleni?_____________
Stepen obrazovanja?________________
Da li imate dece?_________________
UPITNIK
Pred Vama se nalazi izvestan broj tvrdnji koje se odnose na osećanja i reakcije u
različitim situacijama. Procenite stepen slaganja sa navedenim tvrdnjama tako što
ćete označiti odgovarajuće polje(kvadratić) za odredjenu tvrdnju.
77
U ovom dijelu upitnika nalaze se tvrdnje koje se odnose na Vaše doživljavanje
sebe. Uz
Svaku tvrdnju na skali zaokružite jedan broj. Brojevi imaju slijedece znacenje:
1 – uopste ne odnosi na mene
2 – uglavnom se ne odnosi na mene
3 – niti se ne odnosi niti se odnosi na mene
78
4 – uglavnom se odnosi na mene
5 – u potpunosti se odnosi na mene
Upitnik o kvalitetu života
Sada Vas molimo da procenite koliko ste zadovoljni različitim oblastima Vašega
života koje su dole
nevedene (smeštaj, prijateljstva, finansijska situacija itd.). Za procenu koristite

priloženu skalu od 1 do 7.
1-ne može biti gore
2-vrlo nezadovoljan
3-pretežno nezadovoljan
4-i zadovoljan i nezadovoljan
5-pretežno zadovoljan
6-vrlo zadovoljan
7-ne može biti bolje
1) Koliko ste u celini zadovoljni svojim životom danas?_______
2) Koliko ste zadovoljni svojim poslom (ili školovanjem kao glavnim

zanimanjem)?_______
Ili, ako ste nezaposleni ili u penziji, koliko ste zadovoljni kao
nezaposlen/penzioner?______
79
3) Koliko ste zadovoljni svojom finansijskom situacijom?________
4) Da li imate nekoga koga možete nazvati ”bliskim prijateljem”? DA / NE
5) Da li ste se u toku pršle nedelje/sedmice videli sa nekim prijateljem (posetili

prijatelja, Vas je posetio prijatelj
ili se sreli sa prijateljem van kuće ili posla / škole)? DA / NE
6) Koliko ste zadovoljni kvalitetom i brojem svojih prijateljstava?_______
7) Koliko ste zadovoljni svojim aktivnostima u slobodnom vremenu?_______
8) Koliko ste zadovoljni svojim smeštajem?______
9) Da li ste u protekloj godini bili optuženi za neko kriminalno djelo? DA / NE
10) Da li ste u protekloj godini bili žrtva fizičkog nasilja? DA / NE
11) Koliko ste zadovoljni svojom sopstvenom sigurnošću?______
12) Koliko ste zadovoljni ljudima sa kojima živite?________
Ili, ako živite sami koliko ste zadovoljni time?_______
13) Koliko ste zadovoljni svojim seksualnim životom?_______
14) Koliko ste zadovoljni odnosima sa svojom porodicom?______
15) Koliko ste zadovoljni svojim zdravljem?________
16) Koliko ste zadovoljni svojim psihičkim (mentalnim) zdravljem?_________
Sledeca pitanja su o tome kako ste se osecali u poslednjih 30 dana. Molim vas,za
svako pitanje zaokruzite broj koji najbolje opisuje koliko cesto imate taj osecaj.
P1. U toku meseca koliko SVE VECINU PONEKAD RETKO NIKAKO

cesto se osecate… VREMENA
VREME
80
a)…UMORNO BEZ 1 2 3 4 5
RAZLOGA?
b)…NERVOZNO? 1 2 3 4 5
c)… TOLIKO NERVOZNO 1 2 3 4 5

DA ME NISTA NE MOZE
SMIRITI?
d)…BEZNADEZNO? 1 2 3 4 5
e)…NEMIRNO I 1 2 3 4 5
UZVRPOLJENO?
f)…TOLIKO NEMIRNO DA 1 2 3 4 5
NE MOGU DA SEDIM
MIRNO?
g)…DEPRESIVNO? 1 2 3 4 5
h)…TOLIKO DEPRESIVNO 1 2 3 4 5
DA ME NISTA NE MOZE
ORASPOLOZITI?
i)…DA JE SVE NAPOR? 1 2 3 4 5
j)…BEZVREDNO? 1 2 3 4 5
81
LIST
Tables
Tablica 1. Gender structure of respondents ............................................................................ 24

Tablica 2. Age structure of respondents .................................................................................. 25
Tablica 3. Marital status............................................................................................................ 26
Tablica 4. Education structure..................................................................................................... 27
Tablica 5. Having kid/s .............................................................................................................. 28
Tablica 6. Employment/ unemployment .................................................................................. 29
Tablica 7. Emotions and reactions in different circumstances (Part I)................................. 30
Tablica 8. Emotions and reactions in different circumstances (Part II) ...................................... 32
Tablica 9. Emotions and reactions in different circumstances (Part III) ............................. 33
Tablica 10. Problems in the last 2 weeks- Part one ................................................................. 34
Tablica 11. Problems in the last 2 weeks- Part II .................................................................... 35
Tablica 12. Self consideration ................................................................................................... 36
Tablica 13. Self consideration- Part II ..................................................................................... 37
month- Part one......................................................................................................................... 38
Tablica 15. How often do you feel certain symptoms expressed by the claims, during a month-
Part two ....................................................................................................................................... 40
Pictures
Figure 1. Age structure of respondents .................................................................................... 25

Figure 1. Model of Job Satisfaction (Courtesy of J.Field) .......................................................... 50
Figure 3: Model of interaction of motivation, development and systematic planning in the
company Deloitte (by courtesy of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Croatia....................................... 54
82
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I thank my esteemed mentor, Professor. Dr.________________, without whose guidance

this work would not be possible. Also, I thank all those who contributed to this work to
be completed and that there would be a lot of quality information and facts. I hope that
future readers will find in this paper, many interesting things and that they will ease
themselves future studies of this topic.
83

Relationship Between Employment Status and Psychological Wellbeing of Adults in Novi Pazar Research Final.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Relationship Between Employment Status and Psychological Wellbeing of Adults in Novi Pazar Research Final.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMPLOYMENT STATUS

AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELLBEING OF ADULTS IN

Belgrade, February 2018

Belgrade, February 2018

In order to getting better understanding of mental health of employed and unemployed

Convenience sampling will be used to reach unemployed participants and snowball

A Demographics Questionnaire will be devised to gather general information about the

Manchester short assessment of quality of life

Data and expected results

More recently, research on social support and the psychosocial characteristics of

1. Employment increases health status: Employment has social, psychological, and

Employment and health status

Causal relationship between work and health status

Financial Benefits: Employment increases household income and decreases economic

There is a broad consensus among multiple disciplines, government agencies, and

Better health status leads to employment

Health care costs

Evidence from supported employment

Employment and unemployment

Frequenc Percent Valid Cumulative

Vali 2 2.0 2.0 2.0

Žensk 100 49.0 49.0 100.0

Total 202 100.0 100.0

Tablica 1. Gender structure of respondents

Tablica 2. Age structure of respondents

Tablica 3. Marital status

Frequenc Percent Valid Cumulative

Vali Udata/ Oženjen 114 56.4 57.0 57.0

Total 200 99.0 100.0

Miss System 1 1.0

Total 201 100.0

Tablica 4. Education structure

Frequenc Percent Valid Cumulative

Valid SSS 76 38.0 38.0 38.0

VSS 88 44.0 44.0 82.0

Mr 30 15.0 15.0 97.0

Dr 6 3.0 3.0 100.0

Total 200 100.0 100.0

Tablica 5. Having kid/s

Frequenc Percent Valid Cumulative

Valid Da 82 41.0 41.0 41.0

Ne 118 58.0 58.0 99.0

1 1.0 1.0 100.0

Total 201 100.0 100.0

Tablica 6. Employment/ unemployment

Frequenc Percent Valid Cumulative

Vali Da 100 50.0 50.0 50.0

Total 200 100.0 100.0

Tablica 7. Emotions and reactions in different circumstances (Part I)

Tablica 9. Emotions and reactions in different circumstances (Part III)

Tablica 10. Problems in the last 2 weeks- Part one

Tablica 11. Problems in the last 2 weeks- Part II

Tablica 12. Self consideration

Tablica 13. Self consideration- Part II

Organizational Factors of Job Satisfaction

Colleagues. The social atmosphere is an important factor when it comes to job

Research conducted in domestic organization shows that one other characteristic of

Personal Job Satisfaction Factors

Effects of Job Satisfaction

Factors which contribute to Factors which contribute to

Low salary Good leadership

Low insurance Good relationship with

Figure 2. Model of Job Satisfaction (Courtesy of J.Field)

It is necessary to know the complexity of individuals as well as their surroundings. The