The role of workload and driver coping styles in predicting bus drivers’ need for recovery, positive and negative affect, and physical symptoms

Abstract

A survey was conducted on a sample of 159 Australian bus drivers to determine the extent to which workload and self-reported driver coping styles predicted their subjective health status. The model that was proposed incorporated the hours spent driving as a measure of workload, both adaptive and maladaptive driver coping styles, and self-report measures of need for recovery (i.e., fatigue), positive and negative affect, and physical symptoms. Results of hierarchical regression analyses revealed that the workload was a significant predictor of drivers' need for recovery but not of their positive and negative affect nor of their physical symptoms. Need for recovery was in turn a significant predictor of positive and negative affect and of their physical symptoms indicating that it mediates the influence of workload on positive and negative affect and physical symptoms. Two maladaptive coping strategies added to the prediction of need for recovery, as well as to the prediction of negative affect, even after controlling for the influence of need for recovery. One adaptive coping strategy added to the prediction of positive affect. Strategies for management of fatigue in bus drivers should focus on the assessment and remediation of maladaptive coping strategies which impact of drivers' need for recovery which in turn predicts positive and negative affect and physical symptoms.

Design

“…The findings in this study regarding the differences between individuals echo those in the literature about the impact of different coping styles (Machin & Hoare, 2008). This suggests there are benefits to be achieved from training staff to deal constructively with such challenges, and also to consider the ideal personality characteristics for successful drivers when recruiting.…”

Psychological detachment as moderator between psychosocial work conditions and low back pain development

“…Several studies indicated a promoting influence of recovery on well-being and on health in general [41][42][43][44][45], as well as on specific health complaints such as cardiovascular diseases [46,47] or muscle-skeletal diseases [48][49][50]. Participants with low recovery states showed a higher risk of health complaints and were at twice the risk of missing work due to sickness absence [51].…”

Measuring job quality: A study with bus drivers

“…Stansfeld and Candy, 2006;Kivimäki et al, 2012) and low levels of control are a common feature of work in transport (Jettinghoff and Houtman, 2009 Similarly, there are some interesting contradictions in the findings regarding working hours. This has been recognised as a challenge in the industry (Escoto et al, 2010;Johansson et al, 2012;Machin and Hoare, 2008), yet within the current study hours was one of the highest scoring dimensions, with a score of 74.6. There are a number of explanations for this apparent anomaly, including the possibility that the questions about hours which are included in the DGB-Index relate to issues around their planning rather than the reality of working irregular and unsociable hours (Prümper and Richenhagen, 2009).…”