Profiles of Occupational Burnout in the Group of Representatives of High-Risk Professions in Poland.

(1) Background: Working in a high-risk profession is associated with taking on a large responsibility and risking loss of health or life. These professions include, among others, air traffic controllers, firefighters, and ECDs. People working in these professions are particularly vulnerable to experiencing high levels of stress and developing professional burnout syndrome. The aim of the conducted research was to assess the external and internal differences in the intensity of occupational burnout dimensions among representatives of high-risk occupations and to distinguish burnout profiles among them. (2) Methods: The total number of participants working in high-risk occupations who took part in the study was N = 1239, including the following job positions: air traffic controllers (n = 107), firefighters (n = 580), and ECDs (n = 558). The respondents completed the following self-report questionnaires: a structured survey and the Link Burnout Questionnaire. The following statistical tests were performed: cluster analysis, analysis of variance, and chi-square test of independence. (3) Results: The highest intensity of burnout dimensions was presented by representatives of ECDs. Profiles reflecting the types of occupational burnout were distinguished. The representatives of air traffic controllers demonstrated the following profiles: 1-low risk of burnout with a component of psychophysical exhaustion; 2-exhausted with a moderate tendency to disappointment; 3-burned out, ineffective, and uninvolved. The profiles of the ECDs were: 4-engaged, with a reduced sense of effectiveness; 5-with a reduced sense of effectiveness; 6-burned out with a low sense of effectiveness. However, the profiles of the firefighters were: 7-not burned out; 8-at risk of burnout; 9-exhausted with a tendency towards disappointment. Individuals representing the various burnout profiles differed in terms of the severity of the dimensions of occupational burnout as well as sociodemographic and work-related characteristics. (4) Conclusions: The process of occupational burnout varies among people in various high-risk occupations and due to sociodemographic characteristics. The internal differentiation of people representing high-risk professions requires different psychological interventions and preventive measures.

Flexibility in Coping with Stress Questionnaire: structure and psychometric properties.

BACKGROUND: Flexibility in coping relies on applying a coping strategy that is appropriate to the circumstances. Individuals who are flexible in coping exhibit sensitivity to subtle signals sent by the environment. Therefore, they are able to adjust their behaviour accordingly and function in a more adaptive manner. PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE: The study included N = 1535 participants. The following methods were used: the Flexibility in Coping with Stress Questionnaire (FCSQ-14) and the Cognitive Flexibility Inventory (CFI). RESULTS: The Flexibility in Coping with Stress Questionnaire measures flexibility as a feature of the process of coping with which an individual applies coping strategies. The Flexibility in Coping with Stress Questionnaire is an accurate and reliable method of measuring coping flexibility and three of its subscales: the Repertoire of coping strategies, the Changeability of their use, and Reflexivity. CONCLUSIONS: The Flexibility in Coping with Stress Questionnaire examines three subscales of flexibility, namely, Repertoire of coping strategies, Changeability, and Reflexivity. This measurement is accurate and reliable. The questionnaire is applied to the study of persons exposed to severe or chronic stress at work, when we want to assess the individual's ability to change their functioning in a stressful situation. It can be used to examine healthy and somatically ill people, in the area of research and clinical diagnosis.

[Two types of flexibility: in coping and cognitive, and their relationship with stress among firefighters]. / Dwa typy elastycznosci ­ w radzeniu sobie i poznawcza ­ oraz ich relacja z odczuwanym stresem wsród funkcjonariuszy strazy pozarnej.

BACKGROUND: Flexibility in coping with stress and cognitive flexibility are new constructs both in Polish and European psychological sciences. A person displaying flexibility in coping has a wide repertoire of remedial strategies, which he or she is able to change if the situation so requires, and which reflect on the strategies used, while a person displaying cognitive flexibility is ready to look for new ways to cope. The profession of a firefighter involves exposure to various stressors, and occupational stress can affect not only mental health, but also the quality of work performed. That is why flexibility in coping with stress and cognitive flexibility seem so important. The aim of the study was to perform empirical verification of the relationship between flexibility in coping and cognitive flexibility, as well as to determine their relationship with the stress perceived by the respondents. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Overall, 104 firefighters (males only) were qualified for the examination. The average age of the respondents was 34 years (SD = 7.81). The Flexibility in Coping with Stress Questionnaire (FCSQ-14), the Cognitive Flexibility Inventory (CFI) and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) were used. RESULTS: There is a statistically significant relationship between flexibility in coping with stress and its dimensions, and cognitive flexibility and its dimensions, in the examined group of firefighters. The strongest positive relationship was observed between cognitive flexibility and repertoire (r = 0.639, p < 0.001), and the weakest between cognitive control and reflectivity (r = 0.257, p = 0.009). A statistically significant negative relationship was found between flexibility in coping with stress (r = -0.339, p = 0.001) and cognitive flexibility (r = -0.359, p < 0.001), and stress experienced by the respondents. There was no statistically significant relationship between reflectivity, which is a dimension of flexibility in coping with stress, and perceived stress. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to consider the possibility of including in the prevention programs addressed to firefighters the need to support subjective resources, which include flexibility in coping with stress and cognitive flexibility. The results also indicate the need to deepen research in order to better understand the constructs of flexibility in coping with stress and cognitive flexibility. Med Pr. 2020;71(4):441-50.