工作中的工作压力和心理健康之间的关系【外文翻译】
工作压力与心理健康的关系研究
工作压力与心理健康的关系研究工作是现代人生活中不可缺少的一部分,人们为了生活和未来的发展努力工作,但是工作压力也是一个不可避免的问题。
随着社会的发展,工作压力越来越大,特别是现在的社会竞争激烈,很多人为了求职、晋升、获得更高的薪资等原因,会承受巨大的工作压力,因此,心理健康问题也越来越引起人们的关注。
心理健康问题一直是我们必须面对的问题。
随着工作压力和竞争的不断加剧,心理健康问题成为了引起广泛关注的问题。
研究发现,工作压力是心理健康问题的主要原因之一,长期的工作压力会导致许多心理健康问题,如焦虑、抑郁、失眠、压力过大等。
这些问题不仅会影响个人的身心健康,也会影响到日常工作生活及社交关系。
那么,工作压力对心理健康会产生怎样的影响呢?首先,工作压力会对身体产生直接的影响。
工作压力过大会导致身体各个方面的疲劳,例如头痛、肌肉疼痛、胃痛、失眠等等。
当我们处于长期高强度工作压力的状态下,工作压力和心理健康问题会形成恶性循环,会进一步削弱我们的身体和精神健康,使我们变得更加脆弱和易受影响。
其次,工作压力还会对我们的心理产生许多负面影响。
当我们承受着长期的工作压力时,会出现负面思考模式,例如消极、失望、无望等等。
这些负面思考会让我们感到越来越沮丧,从而对我们的生活和工作产生不良影响。
如果长期处于这种状态下,会导致心理问题日积月累,对智力和情感造成负面影响,进而影响到我们的个人生活以及社交关系。
应该如何处理工作压力和维持好心理健康问题呢?首先,减少工作压力是最重要的。
我们能够从职业规划、工作自我管理、时间管理等方面入手,系统地学习如何有效地处理工作压力。
其次,充分休息和锻炼身体,保持理性的情感状态也是维持心理健康的重要方法。
此外,找到与自己交谈的人,分享内心的感受,能够更好地理解和支持自己,这也是重要的应对方法。
总之,工作压力对心理健康问题有很大的影响,它不仅可能导致身体疲劳,也会对心理状态产生消极影响。
因此,我们应该努力克服工作压力,维持身体与心理的稳定,尽力保持一个良好的心理状态,从而更好地面对工作、学习和生活的挑战。
工作压力与心理健康问题的关联研究
工作压力与心理健康问题的关联研究引言:如今,随着社会的不断发展和竞争的加剧,工作压力已经成为许多人面临的一种普遍现象。
而与此同时,心理健康问题也日益突出。
因此,探讨工作压力与心理健康之间的关联以及对个体产生的影响具有重要意义。
一、工作压力对心理健康的影响1.1 压力源和工作环境工作压力往往来自各种不同的源头,如高强度的工作任务、缺乏支持性领导、时间管理困难等。
这些因素会导致个体在工作中承受更大的压力,进而影响其心理健康。
1.2 心理健康问题长期承受过大的工作压力可能会使个体出现一系列心理健康问题。
例如焦虑、抑郁、情绪不稳定等。
这些问题不仅影响个体自身的生活质量,还会对家庭和社会造成一定程度上的负面影响。
二、研究结果和证据2.1 工作压力与焦虑的关系许多研究发现,工作压力与焦虑密切相关。
工作环境中的紧张和竞争往往会使人产生持续不断的担忧和不安感,导致焦虑情绪的加重。
2.2 工作压力与抑郁的关系过大的工作压力还与抑郁有着显著联系。
长期承受过度压力的个体容易出现自我认同感降低、自尊心下降等情况,进而引发抑郁。
2.3 工作满意度和心理健康研究还表明,工作满意度与个体的心理健康密切相关。
对于那些对自己的工作满意度较高的人来说,他们在面对工作压力时更容易保持积极乐观、应对良好。
三、缓解工作压力、促进心理健康的建议3.1 调整工作态度具有正确的工作态度和价值观是缓解工作压力、保持心理健康的基础。
接受挑战、培养积极心态,以及保持良好的工作和生活平衡等都有助于减轻压力。
3.2 增加社会支持社会支持是缓解工作压力的重要因素之一。
在面对挑战时,与家人、朋友、同事进行交流和分享可以有效地减轻心理负担。
3.3 积极应对压力个体应该学会合理应对工作压力,如通过锻炼、休息调整等方式来缓解紧张情绪,并寻求专业心理咨询和帮助。
结论:工作压力与心理健康问题之间存在着明显的关联。
长期承受过大的工作压力可能导致焦虑、抑郁等心理健康问题。
工作压力与心理健康状况的相关性研究
工作压力与心理健康状况的相关性研究概述:在现代社会,工作压力已经成为了许多人面临的常态。
随着工作压力的增加,人们的心理健康状况也受到了影响。
本文旨在探讨工作压力与心理健康状况之间的相关性,并提供一些可能的解决方案。
一、工作压力对心理健康的影响工作压力是指在工作环境中所承受的各种心理和生理上的压力。
长期承受高强度的工作压力可能导致心理健康问题的出现,如焦虑、抑郁和情绪失控等。
此外,工作压力还可能引发身体上的疾病,如高血压和心脏病等。
因此,了解工作压力对心理健康的影响非常重要。
二、工作压力与心理健康之间的关联研究表明,工作压力与心理健康之间存在明显的关联。
高强度的工作压力会增加个体的心理负担,使其难以应对工作和生活的压力。
长期以来,许多研究都发现,工作压力与焦虑和抑郁等心理健康问题之间存在正相关。
此外,工作压力还与睡眠质量下降、自尊心降低以及人际关系紧张等问题相关。
因此,降低工作压力对于维护心理健康至关重要。
三、缓解工作压力的方法1. 寻找工作与生活的平衡:合理安排工作和休息时间,保证充足的睡眠和休息,以缓解工作压力。
2. 建立良好的人际关系:与同事和家人保持良好的沟通和合作,能够提供情感支持和减轻工作压力。
3. 学会放松和调节情绪:通过参加运动、练习冥想和深呼吸等活动,可以帮助释放紧张情绪,缓解工作压力。
4. 寻求专业帮助:如果工作压力长期无法缓解,可以考虑咨询心理学专家,寻求专业的帮助和支持。
结论:工作压力与心理健康状况之间存在明显的相关性。
了解和缓解工作压力对于个体的心理健康至关重要。
通过寻找工作与生活的平衡、建立良好的人际关系、学会放松和调节情绪以及寻求专业帮助等方法,可以有效地减轻工作压力,提升心理健康水平。
在未来的研究中,我们还可以进一步探索工作压力对心理健康的具体机制,以及制定更加个性化的干预措施,为人们提供更好的心理健康支持。
健康心理学外文文献翻译
Collaborative Relationships: School Counselors andNon-School Mental Health Professionals WorkingTogether to Improve the Mental Health Needs ofStudents浅议基于合作关系的学校辅导员和非学校的心理健康专家对学生心理健康需要的改善作用Chris Brown, Ph.D.David T. DahlbeckLynette Sparkman Barnes摘要:本研究调查了53名受聘于各初中、高中的辅导员和管理员关于他们对校内与校外心理健康专家协同工作来回应学生的心理健康需求的看法。
除此之外,本研究还试图了解学校辅导员和学校校长或副校长是如何看待学校辅导员的角色、职责以及对学校辅导员培训的范围。
正文:为了努力提供一系列广泛的服务来帮助学生处理他们带进课堂的社交及情绪问题,学校和社会心理健康机构已经开始实施合作伙伴关系(Walsh & Galassi, 2002)。
沃尔什和加拉西断言,如果我们想要成功的使结构复杂的校内和校外儿童生活产生交叉,我们就必须以整个儿童的发展为重点。
这样做将需要“跨越专业和机构界限的合作”。
体现着学校与社区心理健康机构建立伙伴关系的扩展的学校心理健康计划在美国有不断发展的倾向。
在这些计划中,学校聘请的心理健康专业人员在强调有效地预防、评估和干预方面提供了无数的服务(Weist, Lowie, Flaherty, & Pruitt, 2001)。
这项合作活动是为了减轻教育系统的负担和责任,同时提高了服务的零散和不完整传递给适龄儿童和青年。
研究表明,在申请心理健康服务的年轻人中只有不到三分之一的人得到了他们所需要的关心(美国卫生与人类服务部,1999)。
考虑到提高儿童与青少年心理健康的多系统协作的重要性和认可度,这些合作伙伴关系的知觉功效就是这项调查议程的驱动力。
心理健康与工作压力的关系研究
心理健康与工作压力的关系研究在现代社会,工作压力成为了许多人面临的常态。
人们常常被要求在快节奏的工作环境中追求更高的产出和更好的表现,这对心理健康产生了一定的影响。
本文将探讨心理健康与工作压力之间的关系,并提供一些应对工作压力的方法。
一、工作压力对心理健康的影响工作压力对心理健康产生了广泛的影响。
首先,持续的工作压力会导致焦虑和紧张。
当人们在工作中感到压力过大时,常常会面临与工作相关的忧虑和恐惧,这些情绪会加剧他们的紧张感,从而对心理健康产生负面影响。
其次,工作压力也容易引发抑郁。
长期承受来自工作的压力会导致个体情绪低落、心情沮丧,进而可能发展为抑郁症。
抑郁症对个体的日常生活和工作能力造成了严重的负面影响,甚至可能导致个体产生自杀念头。
此外,工作压力还会对个体的身体健康造成伤害。
一些研究发现,持续的工作压力与患心脏病、高血压等疾病之间存在一定的关联。
工作压力会导致心脏负荷加重、免疫力下降等生理反应,从而增加了患病的风险。
二、应对工作压力的方法虽然工作压力会对心理健康产生负面影响,但我们可以采取一些方法来应对这种压力,保护自己的心理健康。
首先,建立积极的心态是应对工作压力的关键。
我们要对工作保持一种积极乐观的态度,如将工作看作是个人发展的机会,将挑战视为改善自己的机会,这样有助于缓解工作压力对心理健康的负面影响。
其次,合理安排工作和生活的平衡也是重要的。
我们应该学会分配时间和精力,兼顾工作和生活的需求。
定期休息、参加娱乐活动、与家人朋友交流等都是保持身心愉悦的帮助。
此外,积极寻求支持也是缓解工作压力的重要途径之一。
与同事、家人或朋友进行交流,分享自己的困扰和压力,不仅能获得理解和鼓励,还可以得到一些建设性的建议和帮助。
最后,培养良好的心理调适能力也是应对工作压力的重要手段。
我们可以通过运动、冥想、放松训练等方式来调整自己的心态,缓解工作压力带来的负面影响。
总结:心理健康与工作压力存在密切的关系。
持续的工作压力会对个体的心理健康产生负面影响,包括焦虑、抑郁和身体健康问题。
心理健康与工作压力
心理健康与工作压力工作压力是现代社会中普遍存在的现象,每个人都无法完全避免。
然而,良好的心理健康是我们在面对工作压力时所必需的。
本文将探讨心理健康与工作压力之间的关系,并提供一些应对工作压力的方法。
一、心理健康对工作压力的影响心理健康是指个体心理状态的良好程度,包括情绪稳定、适应力强、自我认知清晰等方面。
心理健康状况对工作压力有着直接的影响。
一个心理健康良好的人,能更好地应对工作压力,保持积极的态度和高效的工作状态。
相反,心理不健康的人可能会因为工作压力而产生焦虑、抑郁等负面情绪,甚至可能导致心理疾病的出现。
二、应对工作压力的方法1. 建立良好的工作与生活平衡工作和生活之间的平衡对于维持心理健康起着重要作用。
我们应确保在工作之余有足够的时间去放松自己,参与一些喜欢的爱好活动,和家人朋友进行沟通交流。
只有将工作与生活分开,才能更好地缓解工作压力。
2. 学会有效的时间管理时间管理是有效应对工作压力的关键。
制定合理的工作计划,并设定明确的目标和时间表,激励自己按计划完成任务。
避免临时抱佛脚、过度加班等不科学的工作方式,保证自己有足够的时间去休息和放松,提高工作效率。
3. 培养健康的生活习惯养成健康的生活习惯对心理健康至关重要。
保持充足的睡眠和均衡的饮食,适当参加体育锻炼,都能增强身体素质和抵抗力,帮助我们更好地应对工作压力。
4. 沟通与协调与同事和上级进行积极的沟通与协调,能够促进工作的顺利开展,减轻个人的工作压力。
通过与他人分享和借鉴经验,我们可以更好地解决工作中遇到的问题,提高工作效率。
5. 学会放松适当的放松对于心理健康的维护至关重要。
我们可以通过多种方式来放松自己,如听音乐、看电影、阅读等,让大脑得到休息和放松,恢复精力,更好地应对工作的挑战。
结论心理健康与工作压力之间存在密切的关系。
一个良好的心理健康状况能够帮助我们更好地应对工作压力,提高工作效率。
因此,我们应该重视心理健康的培养和维护,采取积极的方法来应对工作压力,保持良好的心理状态。
工作压力与心理健康
工作压力与心理健康近年来,随着社会经济的快速发展和竞争的加剧,越来越多的人在工作中面临着巨大的压力。
工作压力不仅会影响到人们的身体健康,还会对心理健康产生重要影响。
在这篇文章中,我们将探讨工作压力与心理健康之间的关系,并提出一些有助于缓解工作压力的方法。
一、工作压力对心理健康的影响工作压力不仅仅是一种来自工作量的压力,还包括来自工作环境、上级要求、职业发展等方面的心理压力。
长期承受高强度的工作压力会导致心理健康问题的产生,如抑郁、焦虑、失眠等。
一项研究发现,80%的工作人群存在因工作压力引起的不同程度的心理问题。
工作压力对心理健康的影响有以下几个方面:1.情绪波动:工作压力会导致情绪波动,使人容易疲劳、烦躁、易怒甚至抑郁。
这些情绪问题会进一步影响到人的工作效率和工作质量。
2.身心疲惫:长时间承受高强度的工作压力会导致身心疲惫,使人感到疲惫不堪,精力不集中,影响到工作效果。
3.人际关系紧张:工作压力还会对人际关系产生负面影响。
在高压力的工作环境中,人们常常因为竞争、冲突等问题而与同事关系紧张,甚至会出现人际交往障碍。
4.生活质量下降:工作压力过大会使人无法平衡工作和生活,长期下去,生活质量会下降,甚至会出现身体健康问题。
二、缓解工作压力的方法面对工作压力对心理健康的影响,我们可以采取一些有效的办法来缓解压力,维护心理健康。
1.合理规划工作:合理规划工作内容和时间,制定工作计划,合理安排工作任务,避免任务过于集中和超负荷工作。
2.调整心态:积极调整自己的心态,学会面对工作压力和挑战,培养良好的心理素质。
可以通过学习心理疏导技巧,提高心理抗压能力。
3.规律作息:保持规律的作息时间,足够的睡眠可以帮助身心恢复,提高工作效率。
4.适量运动:适量的身体运动可以释放压力,有助于心情舒畅和身心健康。
5.寻找支持:在工作中遇到困难时寻求合适的支持,可以与家人、朋友或同事交流,寻求理解和建议。
6.培养兴趣爱好:利用休息时间培养自己的兴趣爱好,放松心情,转移注意力。
心理健康与工作压力的关系研究
心理健康与工作压力的关系研究工作是现代人生活中不可或缺的一部分,每个人都会面临一定的工作压力。
然而,这种压力对心理健康会有什么影响呢?本文将探讨心理健康与工作压力之间的关系,并提供一些减轻工作压力的方法。
一、心理健康的重要性心理健康是指一个人在心理上的稳定与平衡。
拥有良好的心理健康对于个人的生活质量至关重要。
它能够影响个人的情绪、情绪反应和行为举止,进而对人际关系、工作效率及生活满意度产生影响。
因此,我们需要关注自己的心理健康,并寻求适当的方式来保持其稳定。
二、工作压力的定义与来源工作压力是指来自工作环境和工作任务的心理压力。
现代社会中,人们面临的工作压力越来越大。
工作压力可能来源于以下几个方面:高工作负荷、工作时间不确定性、工作环境不友好、缺乏控制权、冲突和竞争等。
这些因素可能对个人的心理健康产生负面影响。
三、心理健康与工作压力的关系研究发现,工作压力与心理健康之间存在密切关系。
过高的工作压力可能导致心理健康问题,如焦虑、抑郁和工作压力症等。
长期处于高压工作环境中的人,往往容易出现各种心理健康问题,甚至对身体健康也产生负面影响。
因此,我们需要认识到工作压力对心理健康的影响,采取措施减轻工作压力。
四、减轻工作压力的方法1. 找到适合自己的工作与生活平衡。
合理安排工作时间,保证自己有足够能量去应对工作压力。
2. 学会放松和自我调节。
可以通过体育运动、音乐、阅读等方式,寻找自己的解压方式,舒缓工作带来的压力。
3. 与他人进行交流。
与家人、朋友或同事交流,分享彼此的压力和困扰,寻求帮助和支持。
4. 培养良好的职业素养。
通过学习和提升自己的职业能力,增强自信心和应对压力的能力。
5. 寻求专业帮助。
如果感到工作压力超过自身承受能力,应及时寻求心理咨询师或医生的帮助。
总结:心理健康与工作压力密不可分,过高的工作压力会对心理健康产生负面影响。
因此,我们需要关注并重视自己的心理健康,采取适当的方法来减轻工作压力。
心理健康与工作压力的关联研究报告
心理健康与工作压力的关联研究报告心理健康和工作压力之间的相互关系一直备受研究者的关注。
随着现代社会的不断快速发展,工作压力对个人心理健康的影响越来越受到重视。
本研究旨在探讨心理健康与工作压力之间的关联,并提出一些适当的解决方案来减轻工作压力对心理健康的负面影响。
1. 引言在现代社会,职场竞争日益激烈,工作压力不可避免。
工作压力长期积累可能导致心理健康问题的出现,例如焦虑、抑郁和身心疲惫等。
因此,研究心理健康与工作压力之间的关联对于个人和组织来说具有重要意义。
2. 工作压力对心理健康的影响2.1 心理健康问题的出现高度的工作压力可能引发心理健康问题,例如焦虑和抑郁。
研究表明,与工作压力相关的心理健康问题对个人的生活和工作产生负面影响。
2.2 身心疲惫长期面临高强度的工作压力可能导致身心疲惫,使人感到疲惫不堪、缺乏动力和精神状态差。
这种疲劳状态会对工作效率和个人生活造成负面影响。
2.3 心理健康与工作绩效的关系工作压力对心理健康的影响还可能间接影响到个人的工作绩效。
心理健康问题会降低个人的工作满意度和生产力,进而对整个组织的运营效率产生影响。
3. 如何减轻工作压力对心理健康的影响3.1 寻求社会支持与家人、朋友和同事沟通交流可以帮助释放工作压力,从而缓解心理健康问题的出现。
建立良好的支持网络对于个人的心理健康至关重要。
3.2 健康的生活方式通过良好的生活习惯,如规律的作息时间、健康饮食和适量的体育锻炼,可以增强个人的心理韧性,更好地应对工作压力。
3.3 工作时间管理合理安排工作时间,避免过度加班和工作过度集中,可以降低工作压力的程度,保护个人的心理健康。
3.4 健康的工作环境提供舒适、积极的工作环境可以减少工作压力对个人心理健康的不良影响。
组织应关注员工的工作环境和工作条件,提供支持和资源。
4. 结论本研究分析了心理健康与工作压力之间的关联,并提出了一些解决工作压力对心理健康影响的途径。
为了保护员工的心理健康,组织应该重视工作压力的管理,提供适宜的支持和资源,同时员工也应该积极应对工作压力,寻求适当的帮助和支持以维护自身心理健康。
教师职业倦怠的现状及其影响因素外文翻译
教师职业倦怠的现状及其影响因素外文翻译外文翻译:原文1Personality hardiness, job involvement and job burnout amongteachersBurnout syndrome occurs in response to prolonged stress at work place. Burnout is common among those who are unable to cope with extensive demands and pressure on their energy, time, and resources and those who require frequent contact with people. The term “burnout” originated during the 1960?s as a description of the effect of drug abuse on an individual (Golembiewski, 1993). However, it lacked definitional clarity until the development of a widely accepted instrument for its measurement, the Maslach burnout inventory.Maslach and Jackson (1981) defined burnout as a condition characterized by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and loss of a sense of personal accomplishment. Similarly there has been diverse evidence from scholars on the occurrence of burnout. For example, Maslach and Leiter (1999) indicated that burnout occurs when work load is combined with lack of personal control, insufficient rewards, the absence of fairness, the breakdown of the working community, or conflicting values. Lee and Ashforth (1996) identified work load and time pressure as antecedents of burnout.Numerous work related factors have been found to be associated with burnout among teachers, including excessive time pressure, poor relationships with colleagues, large classes, lack of resources, fear of violence, behavioral problems of pupils,role ambiguity and role conflict, poor opportunities for promotion, lack of support, and lack of participation in decision-making (Abel and Sewell, 1999; Fimian and Blanton, 1987; Friedman, 1991; Wolpin et al., 1991).Researchers found that burnout negatively impacts employees? job attitudes and leads to undesirable behaviors, such as lower job involvement, reduced task performance, and increased turnover intentions (Jackson and Maslach, 1982; Leiter and Maslach, 1988; Motowidlo and Packard, 1986; Shirom, 1989; Wright and Bonett,1997; Wright and Cropanzano, 1998). This study intends to explore the relationship and effects of job involvement and personality hardiness on burnout.During the last few years, some personality variables have attracted the attention of researchers in correlation of job stress and burnout. Despite a common acknowledgement that personality factors play a critical role in mediating stress, these factors have been overlooked in majority of empirical studies on stress. A notable exception has been a series of studies carried out by Kobasa (1979; 1982a,). Kobasa et al. (1982) explored t he concept of “personality hardiness” as a resistance resource that mediates the negative consequences of high level stress.Concept of hardiness focuses on the person that remains relatively healthy after experiencing high amounts of stressful life events. Kobasa argues that persons who experience high degree of stress without falling ill have a personality structure differentiating them from a person who becomes sick under stress. This personality difference is best characterized by the term “hardiness”. Hardiness reflects the individual?s response to life events both personally and professionally (Kobasa, 1979). Three factors, commitment, control and challenge measurehardiness (Kobasa et al., 1982). Commitment reflects a dedication to oneself and to on e?s work. Control is the extent to which an individual influences life events to ensure a particular outcome. Challenge refers to life events and one?s response to those events. Individuals who are hardy cope with various stressors, both personal for example life cycle, family and professional for example occupational roles and relationships, are better than those individuals who are not hardy (Simoni and Paterson, 1997). Rush et al. (1995) found negative relations between hardiness and self-reported illness as a result of stress or burnout. Chan (2003) assessed hardiness and burnout among teachers and found that hardiness has significant impact on emotional exhaustion and personal accomplishment. Crainie et al. (1987) found out that hardiness has beneficial major effects in reducing burnout but does not prevent high level of job stress from leading to high level of burnout. Maslach et al. (2001) found out that people who display low levels of hardiness (involvement in daily activities, a sense of control over events, and openness to change) have higher burnout scores, particularly on the exhaustion dimensions.Other conceptual way of describing job involvement is the “degre e to which a person is identified psychologically with his work” or “the importance of work in his total selfimage” (Lodahl and Kejner, 1965). Such a psychological identification with work may result partly from early socialization training during which the individual may internalize the value of goodness of work. Lodahl and Kejner (1965) emphasized that during the process of socialization, certain workvalues are injected into the individual that remains even at the later stage in the form of attitude toward job. Burnout mayhave negative effects on employees? job attitudes, for example a reduction in job involvement and job satisfaction (Kahill, 1988). Kahill (1988) in a longitudinal study found that burnout negatively affect job involvement. Elloy et al. (1991) demonstrated a negative relationship between burnout and job involvement. Su and Mioa (2006) affirmed the mediating effect of job involvement on emotional exhaustion, diminished personal accomplishment dimensions of burnout.…………Author:Syed Mohammad AzeemNationality:IranOriginate from:International Journal of V ocational and Technical Education V ol. 2(3), pp. 36-40, July 2010译文1教师的人格抗压性,工作积极性和职业倦怠的关系职业倦怠综合症发生在长期的工作压力中。
工作压力与心理健康的关联
工作压力与心理健康的关联如何应对工作压力与维护心理健康在当今竞争激烈的社会中,不可避免地面临各种工作压力。
长时间的工作、高额的工作量和紧迫的工作期限可能会对我们的心理健康产生负面影响。
因此,了解工作压力与心理健康之间的关联,并学会应对工作压力,对于我们维持良好的心理健康至关重要。
首先,我们需要认识到工作压力与心理健康之间的直接关系。
工作压力是指由工作任务和工作条件引起的全身性或局部性身心反应。
长期承受工作压力,可能导致焦虑、抑郁、失眠等心理问题。
研究表明,长期处于高强度的工作状态会增加患心脏病、高血压和其他心血管疾病的风险。
其次,要解决工作压力,我们需要找到适合自己的方法。
首先,时间管理非常重要。
学会合理安排时间,避免拖延和浪费时间,能够有效地减轻工作压力。
其次,我们应该学会设定合理的目标和优先级。
合理的目标能够帮助我们集中精力,并减少工作压力的产生。
最重要的是不要把工作负担全部扛在自己身上,学会与同事分担任务,互相合作完成。
合理分配工作负荷可以减轻我们的精神压力,并增强团队合作的效果。
此外,积极的心态对应对工作压力也非常关键。
工作中遇到困难和挫折是正常的,但是我们应该保持乐观的心态,并找到解决问题的方法。
有时候,我们需要学会放松自己。
通过进行心理调节、参加一些休闲活动或信仰宗教等方式,我们可以帮助放松身心,从而减轻工作压力。
此外,培养一些兴趣爱好也是缓解压力的有效方法,我们可以通过阅读、运动、旅行等活动来忘记工作带来的压力,重新调整心态。
此外,我们还可以通过调整生活方式来缓解工作压力。
健康的生活习惯对于我们的心理健康至关重要。
足够的睡眠和充足的身体锻炼能够帮助我们更好地恢复精力,提高抵抗疾病的能力。
此外,健康饮食也是维护心理健康的重要一环。
如多摄入富含维生素和矿物质的食物,保证身体的正常功能,从而减轻由于工作压力引起的心理问题。
虽然有时我们无法改变工作环境和工作负荷,但是我们可以通过采取积极的措施来减轻工作压力。
工作压力与员工心理健康的关系
工作压力与员工心理健康的关系近年来,随着社会经济的快速发展和竞争的加剧,工作压力成为了现代人生活中不可忽视的一部分。
无论是高层管理者还是基层员工,都面临着各种各样的工作压力,这对员工的心理健康产生了深远的影响。
本文将探讨工作压力与员工心理健康之间的关系,并提出一些缓解压力的方法。
工作压力对员工心理健康的影响是复杂而深远的。
首先,工作压力过大会导致员工产生焦虑和紧张情绪。
在高强度的工作环境下,员工可能面临着时间紧迫、任务繁重等种种压力,这些压力会使员工感到不安和焦虑。
长期处于这种紧张状态下,员工容易出现情绪波动、失眠等心理问题,严重时甚至会导致抑郁症的发生。
其次,工作压力还会对员工的生理健康产生负面影响。
长时间的工作压力会导致员工身体疲惫、免疫力下降,易患各种疾病。
例如,高强度的工作压力可能导致员工出现心血管疾病、肌肉骨骼疼痛等身体不适。
此外,长期工作压力还可能引发消化系统问题,如胃溃疡、消化不良等。
然而,工作压力并非完全是一种负面的因素,适度的工作压力对员工的心理健康也有积极的影响。
适度的工作压力可以激发员工的工作动力和创造力,提高工作效率。
一项研究发现,适度的工作压力可以激发员工的积极情绪,提高工作满意度,从而促进员工的心理健康。
那么,如何缓解工作压力,维护员工的心理健康呢?首先,公司管理层应该关注员工的工作负荷和工作环境。
合理分配工作任务,避免过度压榨员工。
此外,提供良好的工作环境和设施,为员工创造一个舒适的工作氛围,有助于缓解工作压力。
其次,员工个人也需要学会有效地管理自己的工作压力。
例如,制定合理的工作计划,合理安排工作时间,避免过度加班。
此外,培养良好的生活习惯,如定期锻炼、保持良好的饮食和睡眠,有助于增强身体的抵抗力和心理的抗压能力。
此外,寻求社会支持也是缓解工作压力的重要途径。
员工可以与同事、家人或朋友交流,分享自己的困扰和压力。
通过倾听和理解,员工可以得到情感上的支持和鼓励,减轻心理负担,提升心理健康。
工作心理职场压力和心理健康的关系
工作心理职场压力和心理健康的关系在现代社会,职场压力成为了许多人生活中的一部分。
长时间的工作、高强度的工作任务以及激烈的竞争环境对个人的心理健康造成了一定的影响。
本文将探讨工作心理职场压力与心理健康之间的关系。
一、职场压力对心理健康的影响职场压力是指工作环境和工作任务对个人产生的心理负荷。
过度的职场压力会对个人的心理健康产生负面影响。
首先,职场压力会给个人带来焦虑和抑郁情绪。
长期处于高压工作环境中,个人容易感到身心疲惫,产生负面情绪。
其次,职场压力还可能导致个人的自尊心和自信心下降。
面对频繁出现的工作挑战和压力,个人可能会质疑自己的能力和价值,产生自卑情绪。
此外,职场压力还可能引发身体上的不适,例如头痛、失眠、消化不良等。
二、心理健康对职场表现的影响心理健康是指个人在心理方面的良好状态,包括对自己、对他人和对环境的适应。
一个心理健康的个体在职场中通常能够更好地应对压力和困难。
首先,心理健康有助于个人保持良好的工作动力和积极的工作态度。
心理健康的个体通常能够更好地调节自己的情绪,保持积极向上的心态,从而更加专注和投入于工作中。
其次,心理健康还有助于个人的决策能力和问题解决能力的提升。
心理健康的个体通常能够更好地思考和分析问题,找出解决问题的有效方法。
此外,心理健康还有助于个人与同事之间的良好合作和沟通,从而提升整个团队的工作效率。
三、提升心理健康的方法在职场中,个人可以采取一些方法来提升自己的心理健康,以更好地应对职场压力。
首先,个人应该学会合理安排自己的工作与生活,避免过度的工作负荷。
合理的时间管理和工作计划可以帮助个人更好地平衡工作和生活,减少职场压力。
其次,个人可以学习一些心理调节的方法,例如通过运动、放松训练和冥想来缓解压力。
此外,与他人的良好沟通和建立互助网络也是提升心理健康的重要途径。
最后,个人应该培养积极的心态,学会积极乐观地看待问题和挑战。
总结起来,工作心理职场压力与心理健康之间存在密切关系。
工作压力与心理健康之间的关系
工作压力与心理健康之间的关系在现代社会中,工作压力已成为许多人不可避免的现象。
尽管适度的工作压力可以激发人们的工作动力和积极性,但长期的过度压力会严重影响个体的心理健康。
本文将探讨工作压力与心理健康之间的关系,并提供一些缓解压力的方法。
一、工作压力对心理健康的影响工作压力是指工作任务和要求超出个体能力的一种心理负荷。
长期承受工作压力会对个体的心理健康产生负面影响。
1.1 心理健康问题的出现过度的工作压力可能导致焦虑、抑郁、疲劳等心理健康问题的出现。
工作压力过大时,人们容易感到焦虑和紧张,长时间处于这种状态会使人处于高度紧张的情绪中,无法得到有效的放松和休息,长此以往,会引发抑郁等心理疾病。
1.2 身心健康状况恶化过度的工作压力还会导致身体健康的下降。
长时间处于高度压力下,个体的免疫功能会下降,易患各种疾病。
此外,由于工作压力大导致个体忽视身体健康,饮食、运动等方面的不平衡也加剧了身心健康状况的恶化。
二、缓解工作压力的方法为了维护心理健康,个体应该积极寻找缓解工作压力的方法,以减轻心理负担。
2.1 建立良好的工作与生活平衡个体应该在工作与生活之间寻找平衡,保证足够的休息和娱乐时间。
合理安排工作与休息时间,避免过度加班和长时间沉迷于工作,有助于恢复身心的平衡。
2.2 学习放松与排解压力的方法个体可以通过学习一些放松与排解压力的方法来减轻工作压力。
例如,做一些喜欢的运动、听音乐、阅读等活动可以帮助个体释放工作压力,达到放松的效果。
此外,寻求他人的支持和倾诉也是有效的缓解压力的方法。
2.3 培养良好的心态和心理素质培养良好的心态和心理素质对于缓解工作压力至关重要。
个体应该学会面对困难和挫折,保持积极乐观的心态。
适当调整自己对工作的期望值和要求,不要过于苛刻地要求自己,有助于减轻工作压力。
三、公司应对工作压力的措施除了个体需要采取措施缓解工作压力外,公司也应对员工的工作压力给予应有的关注和帮助。
3.1 提供良好的工作环境公司应该创造一个积极健康的工作环境,减少不必要的压力源。
工作压力与心理健康的关系
工作压力与心理健康的关系在现代社会中,工作压力已经成为了许多人面临的普遍问题。
无论是在职场上还是在家庭中,我们都不可避免地会面临各种压力,而这些压力对心理健康的影响也变得越来越重要。
一方面,工作压力可能会对个人的心理健康产生负面影响。
长期面临高强度的工作压力会导致身心疲惫,增加焦虑和抑郁的风险。
工作压力可能使人无法得到足够的休息和娱乐,进而导致失眠、疲劳等身体上的问题。
与此同时,工作压力也会影响人的情绪和人际关系,增加与他人的矛盾和冲突,进一步恶化心理健康状况。
另一方面,心理健康的问题也可能导致工作压力的增加。
当人们面临心理健康问题时,往往难以集中注意力和处理压力情境。
他们可能会因焦虑、抑郁或其他心理问题而产生负面情绪,从而无法有效地应对工作压力。
这种心理负担不仅会影响他们的工作表现,还会进一步加剧他们的焦虑和压力感。
然而,工作压力与心理健康之间的关系并不是单向的。
事实上,人们对工作的意义和满足感会对心理健康产生积极影响。
当个人对其工作感到满意并能够从中获得成就感时,他们的心理健康状况往往更好。
积极的工作体验可以增强个人的自尊和自信,改善心理和情绪状态,帮助人们更好地应对各种压力。
因此,要实现工作和心理健康之间的良好平衡,个人和组织都需要采取一些措施。
个人可以通过培养积极的心理健康习惯来减轻工作压力。
例如,保持良好的工作与生活平衡,定期参加锻炼活动和娱乐活动,寻求社交支持等。
此外,个人还可以通过学习应对技巧和自我调节来增强应对压力的能力。
而组织则应该关注员工的心理健康问题,采取积极的措施来减轻工作压力。
组织可以提供培训和支持,帮助员工掌握应对压力的方法和技巧。
此外,组织还可以建立积极的工作文化,鼓励员工进行团队合作和信息沟通,提供灵活的工作安排和职业发展机会,以提高员工的工作满意度和心理健康水平。
总之,工作压力与心理健康之间存在密切的关系。
工作压力可能对个人的心理健康产生负面影响,而心理健康问题也可能导致工作压力的增加。
心理健康与工作的关系
心理健康与工作的关系随着社会的不断发展,人们对于生活的追求也在不断升级,工作已经成为人们生活中不可或缺的一部分。
但是,随着工作量的不断增加和竞争的加剧,越来越多的人开始感受到工作带来的压力和焦虑,心理健康也成为越来越大的问题。
在这篇文章中,我们将探讨心理健康与工作之间的关系,并提供一些有效的应对策略。
一、心理健康与工作的关系心理健康指的是个人思想、情感和行为方面的健康状况,而工作则是人们日常生活中的重要组成部分。
心理健康与工作之间的关系是相互影响的,健康的心态可以促进工作的顺利进行,而压力和焦虑等负面情绪会削弱人们的工作效率和生产力。
1、工作带来的心理压力随着竞争不断加剧和工作量的不断增加,很多人开始感受到工作带来的压力和焦虑。
工作压力可以通过身体和情绪上的负面反应来体现,例如失眠、头痛、焦虑、抑郁等。
长期的工作压力会对身心健康造成危害,甚至导致严重的身心障碍。
2、心理健康对工作效率的影响心理健康状况会对工作效率产生影响。
对于那些拥有积极乐观心态和预见性的人来说,他们能够更好地适应工作中的压力和挑战,并在工作中保持高效。
相反,那些处于消极和焦虑状态下的人,经常耗费精力于应对自身的负面情绪,无法将工作和生活的其他方面有效整合。
这些情绪状态会降低他们的工作效率,导致自我价值和满意度的降低。
二、如何应对工作带来的压力无论是在工作中还是日常生活中,应对压力和焦虑始终是我们需要面对的挑战。
下面是一些有效的应对策略:1、保留个人时间为了缓解工作带来的压力,保留一些个人时间显得尤为重要。
在忙碌的工作之余,花时间进行自我放松、做些自己喜欢的事情可以帮助我们调节自己的情绪和心态。
2、制定目标规划为了应对工作压力,我们需要有一个清晰的目标规划。
在开始任何工作之前,制定一个清晰的计划可以帮助我们更好地管理时间和完成任务。
这可以帮助我们有效应对工作压力,并提高工作效率。
3、培养健康的生活习惯研究表明,健康的生活习惯能够帮助缓解负面情绪,提高心理健康水平并增强自我保护能力。
工作压力与职场心理健康的关系研究
工作压力与职场心理健康的关系研究近年来,职场中的工作压力问题备受关注。
随着经济的发展和竞争的加剧,工作压力正日益成为人们生活中的主要挑战之一。
然而,与此同时,职场心理健康也成为了广大员工越来越重视的问题。
我们有必要深入研究工作压力与职场心理健康之间的关系,并寻找解决之道。
首先,工作压力与职场心理健康之间存在紧密联系。
从心理学角度来看,长期的工作压力会导致情绪低落、焦虑、抑郁、疲劳等问题。
许多研究表明,工作压力过大可能导致员工身心疲惫,甚至出现职业倦怠的情况。
这对于员工个人来说,无疑是一种沉重的负担。
而且,职场心理健康问题也可能对员工的工作效率产生负面影响,公司的整体业绩也会受到威胁。
其次,我们应该关注工作压力和职场心理健康之间的因果关系。
究竟是工作压力引起了职场心理健康问题,还是因为职场心理健康问题导致了工作压力的增加?这是一个需要深入探讨的问题。
一方面,工作压力可能导致员工的职场心理健康问题,比如压力过大导致的抑郁状态。
另一方面,职场心理健康问题也可能给员工带来更大的工作压力,比如工作中的困惑和不安。
因此,我们需要综合考虑这两者之间的相互作用,以制定出更有效的解决方案。
此外,工作压力与职场心理健康之间的关系还受到一系列因素的影响。
例如,工作环境的因素、员工个人特点等都会对工作压力和职场心理健康产生影响。
一个支持性的工作环境可以减轻员工的工作压力,提升职场心理健康。
而员工的个人特点,比如情绪管理能力、适应能力等也会对职场心理健康产生重要影响。
因此,我们需要综合考虑这些因素,制定出有针对性的解决方案。
如何缓解工作压力和改善职场心理健康呢?首先,建立支持性的工作环境是非常重要的。
公司可以通过改善领导风格、加强员工间的互动和合作,来减轻员工的工作压力。
此外,组织可以提供心理健康咨询服务,以帮助员工解决职场心理健康问题。
其次,员工在个人层面上也需要关注自己的心理健康。
他们可以通过参加一些减压的活动,比如运动、读书、与朋友聚餐等,来缓解工作压力。
充满压力的工作环境与心理健康的关系
充满压力的工作环境与心理健康的关系在现代社会中,人们经常面临着充满压力的工作环境。
无论是高强度的工作任务、竞争激烈的工作环境,还是与同事之间的紧张关系,都可能对个人的心理健康造成负面影响。
因此,我们有必要探讨充满压力的工作环境与心理健康之间的关系,并寻找相应的解决办法。
首先,充满压力的工作环境对心理健康产生了不可忽视的影响。
工作压力可能导致焦虑、抑郁等心理问题的发生。
长期处于高压工作状态下,人们的精神紧张程度将会升高,容易出现情绪失控、疲劳、失眠等问题。
此外,压力还可能影响身体健康,如引起高血压、消化系统疾病等。
因此,我们必须认识到充满压力的工作环境对于心理健康的危害,从而采取措施保护自己的心理健康。
那么,如何应对充满压力的工作环境呢?首先,我们可以通过调整心态来减轻工作压力。
工作中遇到问题时,我们不妨调整心态,从积极的角度看待问题,寻找解决问题的方法。
此外,我们还可以培养一些放松的爱好,如运动、阅读、旅行等,以减轻工作带来的压力和紧张情绪。
此外,与同事之间的良好合作关系也能够缓解工作压力,增强个人的心理健康。
另外,组织和企业也有责任创造一个良好的工作环境,关注员工的心理健康。
首先,企业可以通过提供培训和发展机会,提升员工的能力和自信心,使其能够应对工作中的挑战。
其次,企业应该建立健康的工作文化,倡导合理的工作时间和休假制度,避免过度劳累。
此外,企业还可以提供一定的心理辅导服务,帮助员工解决工作和生活中的心理问题。
在政府层面,也需要出台相关政策来保护员工的心理健康。
政府可以加强对企业的监管,要求企业提供良好的工作环境和心理健康保障措施。
此外,政府还可以加大对心理健康领域的投入,提供更多的心理咨询和治疗服务,以满足人们对心理健康的需求。
总之,充满压力的工作环境与心理健康之间存在着密切的关系。
我们必须重视并采取措施保护自己的心理健康,如调整心态、培养放松的爱好等。
同时,组织和企业以及政府也有责任创造一个良好的工作环境,关注员工的心理健康。
心理健康问题与工作压力的关联
心理健康问题与工作压力的关联随着现代社会的快节奏发展,工作压力成为越来越多人们关注的话题。
而与此同时,心理健康问题也逐渐成为人们生活中不可忽视的一部分。
实际上,心理健康问题与工作压力之间存在着紧密的关联。
本文将从心理健康问题对工作压力的影响、工作压力对心理健康问题的影响以及应对心理健康问题与工作压力的综合策略等方面进行探讨。
一、心理健康问题对工作压力的影响1. 产生焦虑和抑郁情绪心理健康问题如焦虑和抑郁经常会给人们的工作带来负面影响。
当一个人面临心理健康问题时,常常由于思维敏感、注意力不集中等原因导致焦虑情绪增加,容易对工作上的细节产生过度的关注和担忧,结果造成工作效率下降。
2. 影响人际关系和团队协作心理健康问题也容易影响人际关系和团队协作。
当一个人心情低落或存在情绪波动时,很难正常与同事进行有效沟通和合作。
这种情况下,团队的凝聚力和工作效率都可能受到一定的影响。
3. 减弱自我调节能力心理健康问题会削弱个体的自我调节能力。
当人们面临高强度的工作压力时,如果心理健康问题得不到及时的缓解,个体的情绪和能力受到压力的制约,进而导致工作质量下降,甚至出现错误和失误。
二、工作压力对心理健康问题的影响1. 导致焦虑和抑郁工作压力过大会给人们带来焦虑和抑郁等心理健康问题。
工作中的高强度、高负荷以及长时间的紧张状态会让人们感到无法适应和应对,进而在心理上产生压力,慢慢积累形成焦虑和抑郁情绪。
2. 诱发身体疾病工作压力长期存在对身体健康造成负面影响。
持续的工作压力可能导致免疫系统下降、消化系统紊乱以及心血管疾病等身体问题的发生。
这些身体疾病反过来又会进一步影响个体的心理健康。
3. 影响睡眠质量工作压力过大会导致睡眠质量下降。
当一个人经历高强度的工作压力后,身体和大脑很难在晚上得到充分的休息,导致入睡困难、睡眠浅、多梦或早醒等问题。
长时间的睡眠质量不良会进一步加重心理健康问题的发生。
三、应对心理健康问题与工作压力的综合策略1. 建立良好的工作与生活平衡为了有效应对心理健康问题与工作压力的关联,个体需要学会建立良好的工作与生活平衡。
外文翻译---心理健康
Mental healthAcknowledgments are in order for the many faculty and family members who have provided support, guidance, and encouragement throughout this process. I am appreciative of the help that each person has given. I wish to thank those faculty members who each contributed to my increased understanding of this process, the subject matter, and the importance of rigorous research. I am especially thankful for the consistent support and guidance from my advisor, Dawn Anderson-Butcher. She spent many hours steering my efforts and providing me quality feedback that always allowed me to think critically and push myself further than I ever imagined. I would also like to thank Tamara Davis for her encouragement, enthusiasm, and ongoing support for not only this thesis but for my professional development as well. Additionally, thanks are in order to Jerry Bean for his always refreshing perspectives and solid technical support. I would also like to thank Tony Amorose for stepping in to provide even further assistance and contributing greatly to my understanding of data analysis.Finally, many thanks go to my family who has provided endless support from begi- nning to end. My mother, Sholeh Mesbah, and step-father, William Stone, have de- monstrated their love for me by answering the phone at all hours, allowing me to talk through all frustrations, and encouraging me to keep moving forward. Also, my fat- her, Mark Ball, and step-mother, Nilsa Ramirez , consistently kept me grounded by reminding me that, thesis or not, everyday life continues. Last but not least, I would like to thank my sister, Amanda Ball. Her optimism, support, and love were unwavering.According to the most recent Surgeon General’s Report on Mental Health , 9 to 13 percent of all U.S. children and adolescents have serious emotional disturbances. Moreover, 21 percent of U.S. children have diagnosable mental or addictive disorders. Unfortunately, most of thesechildren never receive adequate care. Seventy-nine percent of children ages 6 to 17 with mental disorders do not receive care. Additionally, uninsured and minority children have higher rates of unmet need than those who are insured or non-minority. Much of this unmet need can be attributed to the significant shortage in the children’s mental health workforce. Considering that 49.6 million students are enrolled in public elementary and secondary schools, it is evident that many of these children’s mental health needs manifest at school, often leading to such pressing concerns as violence in schools or significant behavior disruptions. Schools are often placed in the position to not only educate children but to also support those children who bring their mental health issues to school. To meet these changing needs, school improvement efforts must focus on standards-based accountabilities but also prioritize strategies related to addressing students’ barriers to learning, including mental health-related needs. Research provides strong evidence for this relationship noting, (1) that students’ mental health concern s can drastically impact academic success and healthy development (Becker & Luther, 2002) and, (2) that interventions addressing students’ social-emotional skills can positively impact academic achievement. Given this relationship, academic success for all students is dependent upon student social-emotional well being, particularly in those communities at highest risk. Additionally, children are not the only ones affected by these non-academic barriers to learning. Student mental health needs create increasing demands on educators who must create and manage effective classroom learning environments. For instance, discipline and classroom management for students with emotional and behavioral disorders have been found to be particularly stressful for educators. As such, schools are increasingly faced with student mental health needs. As the demand for mental health services in schools has grown dramatically in the past 30 years, school support services now include a broader range of services than in the past. As such, schools arenow in some cases considered the “de facto mental health care system for children”. In spite of this de facto system, children’s mental health needs remain unmet. As a result, schools are beginning to see the ramifications of these unmet needs as they pertain to poor academic achievement among students. Essentially, schools have been unable to fully address students’ mental health needs through traditional practices and traditional means. A national survey of school mental health services recently reported that, generally, funding for school mental health has decreased in the past 5 years while demand for services has increased in most districts. Additionally, districts also reported that referrals to community-based mental health providers have increased but the availability of these practitioners to provide services has decreased. As student academic success is closely tied to social-emotional well being, school change efforts must begin to address these needs if they are to meet their accountabilities. Doing so requires schools to consider new models of school improvement that include social-emotional development along with traditional standards-based accountabilities.To meet the needs of children today and to improve academic outcomes for all children, it is imperative that schools utilize new models of school improvement that include effective methods to address mental health needs. This process, however, will involve a cultural shift in educational systems that have historically focused on traditional forms of school improvement.Most traditional school improvement often focuses on “walled in approaches” such as enhanced curriculum alignment, improved instructional methods, and standards-based accountabilities. In addition, most current school improvement models are narrowly focused on result-oriented improvements in instruction and behavior management rather than on system-wide efforts to address barriers to learning. As a result, these models often marginalize programs, services, and systems that address mental health-centered learning supports, resulting infragmented services, isolated student support personnel, and ineffective planning models to address student needs. New models of school improvement are called for that focus on e nhancing schools’ abilities to meet the mental health needs of all children. These models must be rooted in the fundamental work of educators and also consider the diversity of needs among school systems, staff, and students. Emergent Models Include School Mental Health Because of these emergent findings, schools have recently begun implementing school improvement initiatives that include specific areas related to school mental health. For instance, Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS), a system-wide prevention strategy targeting behavioral management, is becoming increasingly popular as a method of changing student behavior through alterations in systems and procedures. While focused primarily on behavioral management, PBIS includes a continuum of services consisting of universal, selected, and targeted supports and interventions ensuring that all students receive effective behavior management practices. As a system-wide strategy for behavior management, PBIS has demonstrated effectiveness for reducing discipline referrals and suspensions as well as improving overall school climate. However, the scope of PBIS is limited to behavioral concerns, focusing on the reduction of disruptive, externalized behaviors and leaving out students with more internalized behavior issues. While PBIS is limited to behavioral concerns, it offers an example of system-wide change to address students’ nonacademic needs and promote positive social-emotional development. Similarly, the Centers for Disease Control has been encouraging schools to explore various non-academic priorities through a Coordinated School Health Program (CSHP) that involves the interaction of multiple components all centered on promoting student well-being (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2007). The key CSHP components span health education and physical education, health services and nutrition services, counseling and psychologicalservices, healthy school environment, and family/community involvement (CDC, 2007; Murray, Low, Hollis, Cross, & Davis, 2007). CSHP promotes the coordination of policies, activities, and services that address these components and, ultimately, provide for the health of school students and staff while strengthening schools to be “critical facilities” for service provision and coordination (CDC, 2007, n.p.). Rigorous evaluation of this model has been difficult in the past; however, evidence does support the positive effects of incorporating health education, parent involvement, nutrition services, and mental health programs into more traditional school improvement efforts.Finally, other models incorporate efforts to address system-wide concerns, individual academic, health, and mental health student needs, and community collaboration. The School Development Program (SDP), created by James Comer and the Yale Child Study Center, mobilizes schools to focus on students’ social-emotional and academic development through student-centered programming utilizing six developmental pathways: (1) physical; (2) ethical; (3) social; (4) language; (5) psychological; and, (6) cognitive (Yale Child Study Center, 2004). An SDP requires a management team, student and staff support team, and a parent team to operate through three guiding principles that steer their functioning – no-fault (utilizing a problem-solving approach), consensus, and collaboration. Full-service schools offer another model of school improvement that fosters healthy physical, intellectual, and social-development. Dryfoos (1994) identifies full-service schools as community centers that meet the educational, health, mental health, and social-emotional needs of children. Through extensive collaborative efforts, these schools partner with local agencies to provide wide ranging services to impact youth development, including those services related to mental health. Integrated service delivery systems can increase access to services and improve service delivery . With an emphasis on prevention and collaboration, full-service schools are one example of broad schoolimprovement efforts that work to meet children’s mental health needs.The Ohio Community Collaboration Model for School Improvement (OCCMSI) also provides an example of new models of school improvement focused on students’ nonacademic barriers to learnin g, including mental health issues. This model addresses the need for schools and educators to gain influence over students’ out-of-school time and on the need for schools to further utilize existing family and community resources to optimize student learning and healthy development through the use of systematic organization of numerous improvement components. Focused on building system capacity for improvement, the OCCMSI involves continuous planning and improvement processes that are evaluation-driven and anchored in “milestones” that mark developmental progress for school leaders (Anderson-Butcher et al., in review, p. 8). Additionally, the OCCMSI five content areas guide this expanded school improvement initiative –academic learning, youth development, parent/family engagement and support, health and social services, and community partnerships.These more expansive school improvement strategies all offer a broadened view of school improvement and could positively impact the roles schools play in addressing student mental health needs. Unfortunately, these models and the programs and services they include are often considered ancillary to the academic work of schools and thus hold limited potential for long-lasting change (Center for Mental Health in Schools at UCLA, 2005). More recent efforts in this area have been made to more closely align broader school improvement models with academic outcomes. There is preliminary support that broadened school improvement efforts can foster the integration of mental health and educational service. While comprehensive, coordinated school reform is a growing research area, studies have demonstrated improved academic outcomes, service integration, and overall capacity for addressing non-academic barriers to learning. Given these preliminary findings, thenext step to improve social-emotional and academic outcomes for children is to systematically examine how schools adopt and implement such initiatives. Research in translational science and the diffusion of innovations can expand the existing knowledge on school change efforts. These areas have explored change processes within organizations to identify key components of successful change efforts. Additionally, translational science has specifically focused on disseminating research to the practice arena. A focus on readiness is one component of effective organizational change strategies that can lead to long-lasting school improvement.Organizational change research identifies readiness as a key construct related to the effective and efficient implementation of any innovation, including expanded school improvement models addressing school mental health. Readiness signifies that an organization or an organization’s members feel willing to implement an innovation. A careful an alysis of an organization’s readiness for change can greatly impact innovation adoption and implementation and thus create long-lasting, successful school change. Furthermore, the collaborative use of readiness information can facilitate an empowerment process in which specific innovation champions are identified or, in cases where little variability exists, buy-in is generated as consistency in readiness is demonstrated across the school. As readiness is central to change efforts, a deeper understanding of those factors that most influence readiness can build organizational capacity to implement change effectively. The knowledge base on organizational change identifies a number of factors that impact readiness, including perceived ability to implement the innovation, value for the innovation, and effective communication channels . Much of this research on readiness, however, is conceptual and does not focus specifically on readiness in schools. Building from the existing research, a specific look at readiness to adopt school mental health approaches allows for a better understanding of what is needed toeffectively implement approaches that meet students' needs. At this point, more research is needed on school readiness to adopt innovations, specifically school improvement efforts focused on student mental health.To begin to impact school readiness to adopt mental health approaches, a closer look at the individuals involved in organizational change is critical. Organizational readiness for change is often significantly impacted by individual readiness for change. Therefore, research can start with a focus on individual factors that indicate readiness. As strong potential change agents and integral components of the education system, educators’ readiness for c hange can greatly contribute to an organization’s readiness to adopt school mental health approaches. System-wide change to address student mental health needs often relies on educators as program-service providers for both practical and fiscal purposes, among others. As central players in school mental health approaches, it is important to study the pro- cesses that lead educators to implement programs and initiatives that address men- tal health. However, little research has examined educators’ involveme nt in school change, particularly with regard to mental health-education integration . Currently, research examining organizational change has only informed school improvement efforts in a limited way. Substantial research demonstrates the need for not only new models of school improvement but also new models that include emphases on stud- ent mental health needs. Educators hold a key role in school improvement and in the provision of a continuum of services to meet student needs. There are a number of var iables related to educators’ roles in schools , particular ones of interest here are educator stress, teaching self-efficacy, professional support, and perceptions of stu- dent mental health needs.Educators’ perception of student mental health needs also is a potential factor related to readiness to adopt school mental health approaches. School mental health approaches may offer educators the opportunity to address increasing mental health needs among students.While this area has received little empirical study, some research indicates that educators’ perception of student mental health needs is also related to educator stress. Additionally, educators have reported feeling overwhelmed when confronted with student mental health needs. Therefore, educators’ ability to address student mental health needs could also reduce educator stress. Also, educators may be more ready to adopt school mental health approaches as they are faced with increased student mental health needs. Because the mental health and education systems have not been historically integrated, it is important to explore this area to better understand how mental health among students impacts teachers, students, and quality care for children. Furthermore, research has indicated that educator stress is related to student mental health needs and that professional support and teaching self-efficacy are also related to educator stress. There are no existing studies, however, that explore the interactions among all of these constructs.心理健康根据最近期的外科医生一般的心理健康报告,9%至13%的美国儿童和青少年有严重的情绪困扰。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。
外文翻译原文The Relationship between Job Stress and Mental Health at Work Material Source:Industrial Health 1997, 35, 29-35 Author:Jun Shigemi, Yoshio Mino, Toshihide Tsuda, Akira Babazono and Hideyasu Aoyama Selyel defined stress as the state manifested by a specific syndrome which consists of all the nonspecifically induced changes within a biologic system. Using an experimental study, he proved that stress induces a common pathological change which he called "general adaptation syndrome." He did not specify the character of stress. Stress which was comfortable to the individual and essential for development and growth was called eustress, while stress which was unpleasant or harmful to the individual was called distress.Holmes and his collaborator weighted and scored stressful life events. They proved that severe health impairment is likely to occur if people have severe stressful life events and if the life events score exceeded 300 points in the previous year. Nevertheless, it was reported that there was only a weak relationship between the strength of stress and the incidence of psychiatric or somatic diseases. Knowing these facts, researchers attempted to identify other stress factors which affected psychiatric or somatic diseases.Lazarus and his collaborators reported that the daily hassles of living having continuous and chronic characteristics are a significant stress. These "daily hassles" appeared to be better predictors of health outcomes than life events. Recently, the causal relationship between job stress and psychiatric illness or cardiovascular disease was studied. The job-demand-control-support model suggests that psychological strain and subsequent somatic diseases resulted from the interaction of three types of job characteristics: job demand, job decision latitude, and work related social support. In Japan, causal relationship between job stress and mental health has been drawing the attention of researchers who are currently studying job stress. Therefore, the study of job stress is important to develop strategies for the prevention of stress related diseases and for health promotion. However, the relationship between job stress and problematic mental health state has not beenestablished in Japan. We hypothesized that adverse effects of subjective job stress on mental health state is great, and we estimated that some types of prevalence odds ratios between job stress and mental health would be more than two. The purpose of this study is to clarify the relationship between job stress and problematic mental health state quantitatively using prevalence odds ratios.A cross-sectional study was performed using a self-administered questionnaire given to the employees of an electric company in Okayama city, Japan. All subjects were workers producing minute electric parts. We selected this company because of its different work places, which allowed us to examine the characteristics of workers more precisely. Among 782 workers, 763 responded to the questionnaire satisfactorily. The response rate was 97.6%. The questionnaire consisted of demographic questions such as gender, age, marital status, and employment section as well as questions taken from the Japanese version of the 30-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) , and a questionnaire about subjective job stress developed by Uehata et al. We added questions about satisfaction with family life and physical health states.We used the 30 item Japanese version of the GHQ as a measure of the mental health state. A cut-off score of 718 points using GHQ method was considered reasonable in Kitamura's study on the validity of the 30-item GHQ. Therefore, we defined response showing a GHQ score of 8 points or more as representing individuals with problematic mental health states, and responses showing 7 points or less as representing individuals without any mental health problems.We treated the items of physical health status and satisfaction with family life as categorical data. We weighted two points on individuals who answered "very healthy" or "healthy," weighted one points on individuals who answered "ordinary" and weighted zero points on individuals who answered "not healthy so much" or "not healthy." We weighted two points on individuals whose answers were "dissatisfied very much" or "dissatisfied" and weighted one point on individuals whose responses indicated neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, and zero points on individuals whose answers were "very satisfied" or "satisfied." We employed a multiple logistic regression model controlling for potential confounding factors: gender, age, marital status, satisfaction with family life, and physical health state.In the logistic regression model, we used all items of subjective job stress in spite of the high value of the alpha coefficient, because we thought that the interrelationship between subjective job stress and problematic mental health stateshould be analyzed with respect to every item of subjective job stress. Adjusted odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals for the odds ratios of each level of subjective job stress to mental health state were calculated.Although we thought that sex was a potential confounding factor, sex was not a significant variable in the multiple logistic regression analysis. Crude data analysis between subjective job stress and GHQ score showed same tendency by each sex.In the correlation matrix coefficients of the logistic regression model, marital status showed a strong negative correlation (more than 0.5 in absolute value) to the subgroups with age range of 30-39 years and 40-49 years. Then, we excluded the variable regarding marital status from the multiple logistic regression model because of its multicollinearity.In our study, the proportion of individuals with problematic mental health state was 37.8% in the total subjects, 41.7% in males and 34.3% in females. Iwata reported on the prevalence of depressive symptoms in a Japanese tax office using the Japanese version of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale. He found that 15.2% of males and 10.6% of females had high levels of depressive symptoms. Our study measured problematic mental health states by use of the GHQ. We could detect the cases from the GHQ more than cases of depressive symptoms and then our concept of problematic mental health state was broader than Iwata's depressive symptoms. Therefore, our prevalence was higher than depressive symptom.This study investigated the relationship between subjective job stress and problematic mental health state. Therefore, we used multiple logistic regression to estimate quantitative measures of subjective job stress and problematic mental health state, adjusted by potential confounding factors of gender, age, satisfaction with family life and physical health state. Our results showed that the items related to subjective job stress because of "too much trouble at work," "too much responsibility," "poor relationship with superiors," "are not allowed to make mistakes" and "cannot keep up with new technology" were related to mental health state. Consequently, it is suggested that subjective job stress can be harmful to a worker's mental health state and cause "distress," which was caused by an injury from the nonspecific response of a living body to negative stimuli, according to Selye.We recognized that interpersonal conflict between the worker and his superiors might be an important risk factor for mental health in our cross-sectionalstudy. In the model of National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, this type of interpersonal conflict is involved in job stressors. Therefore, cooperative relationships with superiors and colleagues as job support might be important in maintaining healthy mental state. Our study suggests that "Cannot keep up with new technology" is another risk factor for mental health, especially in male workers. In Japanese industries such as electrical factories, workers are placed in highly automated circumstances. Therefore, work related to highly developed technology might be a source of job stress.Our quantitative estimation of job stress might have under or over-estimated the magnitude of job stress because job stress may be affected by familial stress. Therefore, we hypothesized multiplicative interaction between subjective job stress and feeling of dissatisfaction with family life, and analyzed the logistic regression using an interaction model. Adjusted odds ratio with interaction between subjective job stress and mental health showed the quantitative measure of multiplicative terms between job stress and familial stress and those interaction terms. But the positive multiplicative interaction model was not significant. From another point of view, there was a space to analyze the additive interaction model.The purpose of this study is to clarify the relationship between subjective job stress and mental health. From the result of the multiple logistic regression analysis controlling confounding factors, some kinds of subjective recognition of job stress were shown to possibly be related to problematic mental health state because of the more than double degrees of prevalence odds ratio. Accordingly, our prevalence odds ratios with values above double would have more than 50% of attributable proportion in the causal inference between subjective job stress and problematic mental health state. Therefore, further studies to clarify causal relationship between job stress and mental health are required to prove it.译文工作中的工作压力和心理健康之间的关系资料来源:产业健康,1997年,35期,29-35页作者:Jun Shigemi, Yoshio Mino, Toshihide Tsuda, Akira Babazono and Hideyasu Aoyama 赛亚将压力定义为一个特定的综合征,包括引起生物体系内的非特异性的变化。