Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Article

The Mediating Role of Trait Anxiety In The Relationship Between The Organizational Power Resources Used By School Principals And Teachersʹ Work Alienation Levels

Altmetrics

Downloads

111

Views

66

Comments

0

This version is not peer-reviewed

Submitted:

09 October 2024

Posted:

10 October 2024

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
In this study, we examined the effects of the organizational power resources used by school principals on teachers' work alienation and trait anxiety levels. Then, we examined the mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between organizational power resources and work alienation. We used the correlational scanning model and mediation model in the research. The research sample consists of 400 teachers working in Turkish public schools. In our research, "Organizational Power Scale in Schools", "Work Alienation Scale" and "Trait Anxiety Scale" were used. As a result of the research, we found significant relationships between the variables. Accordingly, there is a positive relationship between trait anxiety and work alienation, a positive relationship between trait anxiety and coercive power and legal power, a negative relationship between trait anxiety and expert, charismatic and reward power, a positive relationship between work alienation and coercive power, and a positive relationship between work alienation and reward power. Negative relationships were observed between expertise and charismatic power. Finally, it was determined that trait anxiety had a mediating role in the relationship between the power resources used by school principals and the level of work alienation of teachers.
Keywords: 
Subject: Social Sciences  -   Education

1. Introduction

Managers need power to achieve organizational goals. Power is important for achieving organizational goals [1]. Because power is necessary to carry out work in organizations [2]. Power is an important element in planning the future of organizations, resolving conflicts in the organization and control mechanisms [3]. There are different definitions of power. Power is expressed as the ability to influence employees for a purpose [4,5], the ability to control other individuals [6], the dependence of person B on person A [7] has been made. As can be seen from the definitions, the word power is explained with concepts such as influence, dependence and authority. The reason for these different definitions is related to where the power comes from.
Among the studies on power supplies, the most accepted study in the literature is the power supplies model of French and Raven [8]. According to this model, organizational power resources are examined in five sections. These are legal power, coercive power, reward power, expert power and charismatic power. Legal power is the power taken from the authority and the laws. In other words, it refers to official authority. Coercive power is the ability to force individuals to do work with the power gained from authorities and laws. It is based mostly on pressure and threats. Reward power is the ability to influence employees by using rewards. Individuals perform tasks to benefit from rewards. Expertise power, one of the personality powers, refers to the knowledge and experience power of leaders. The leader's capacity, expertise, skills, and field dominance are related to expert power. Charismatic power refers to the application of power by using the personal characteristics of leaders. What is important in charismatic power is that the employee admires the leader. Thus, it may be easier for employees to be influenced.
There are many studies in the literature about power supplies. The terms job satisfaction and satisfaction [1,2,9,10,11,12], organizational commitment [2,13,14], leadership styles and characteristics [15,16], job performance [17,18,19], organizational silence [20,21] organizational cynicism [22], organizational trust [23], organizational climate [24], job stress [17], dedication to work [25] have been found to be related. Studies have focused on the effects of organizational power on the organization and its employees. Based on the existing research and literature, it can be seen that reward, expertise, and charismatic power positively affect the organizational behavior of employees. However, legal power and coercive power negatively affect the organizational behavior of employees [1,2,4,5,10,11,14,22,26]. In short, organizational power can have positive and negative effects, depending on how managers use power.
While power can be an effective management element for leaders, it can also turn into a dangerous problem [26]. If managers use power unconsciously, it may have negative repercussions on the organization and employees. Therefore, school principals should use power correctly and effectively. Not knowing how to use power effectively is an important problem for managers [27]. Being able to predict the effects of power means using power effectively [28]. Therefore, if school principals know the reflections of power on teachers, they can prevent negative situations with a precautionary approach. Principals can also direct teachers' organizational behavior by using power effectively [2] because power becomes functional and positive if it is used for organizational purposes [14].
When school principals use power unconsciously, both teachers' mental health and organizational behavior can be negatively affected. Interaction in the workplace environment affects individuals' quality of life and mental health [29]. Negative power creates stress and insecurity in employees [3]. The quality of life of stressed teachers decreases [30]. A study indicates that stress symptoms are related to anxiety [31]. In the literature, organizational power has been proven to be related to variables that can negatively affect an individual's mental health and organizational behavior, such as cynicism (22), organizational silence [21], job stress [17], and professional alienation [32]. In this context, anxiety and alienation from work may also be observed in teachers after exposure to the negative use of power.
Teaching is a stressful profession. Stress causes burnout, inefficiency, and poor performance [30,33]. A study concludes that most teachers are unhappy with their profession [34]. Thus, teachers may experience anxiety and alienation from work. According to a meta-analysis study that examines teachers' anxiety, depression, burnout, and stress, the prevalence of anxiety among teachers is between 38-42% and burnout is between 25-74% [33]. In this context, anxiety and burnout can be considered important problems for teachers. Because teachers who experience anxiety and alienation from work have problems with their mental health. The job performance and life satisfaction of teachers with mental health problems may decrease. They may be uninterested in school and students, which prevents organizational success. Therefore, teachers' alienation from work and teacher anxiety are issues that need to be taken into consideration by schools.
Alienation is the situation in which individuals become indifferent to their own self and environment as a result of developing a negative attitude towards an object, event, situation, or people. [35]. In this context, the situation where individuals develop a negative attitude towards their work due to the problems they experience in organizations and do not enjoy their work is defined as alienation from work. Work alienation can be examined in five dimensions. These are the dimensions of powerlessness, meaninglessness, normlessness, isolation, and self-estrangement. Powerlessness is a situation where individuals do not have a say in their lives, have low motivation, and lack life energy. In this context, the individual feels psychologically weak, believing that he cannot do anything about an issue. As a result, they display an indifferent attitude towards work. Meaninglessness arises from the individual's inability to comprehend the events and situations in his or her life. When we think about it organizationally, it is the feeling that occurs in individuals due to not knowing why they do what they do and not being able to understand what purpose it serves. Normlessness is when individuals choose ways that society does not approve of to achieve their goals. In the organizational context, it can be explained as a failure to comply with the order required for the functioning of the organization. Isolation is the situation where an individual isolates himself socially by moving away from person-organization harmony. Self-alienation is the situation where individuals move away from themselves as a result of being dissatisfied with their feelings, thoughts, and behavior [35]. Teachers may experience work alienation in all dimensions [36]. Personal and social factors are effective in teachers' alienation from work [34]. Monotony in the work environment, negative working conditions, conflicts, negative relationships, and managers' attitudes can cause alienation from work. In addition, the structure and functioning of the organization, and the power resources used by managers can also cause alienation from work. In this context, apathy towards work, moving away from work, and isolation from the organization are indicators of alienation from work [4,37]. Negative attitudes towards work, social adaptation problems, isolation, and job dissatisfaction may be observed in teachers who are alienated from work. Work alienation is a big problem for organizations.
Research on work alienation is available in the literature. Work alienation has been examined with variables such as [48], organizational cynicism [49], work stress [50,51], workplace loneliness [52], organizational climate [38,39,40] organizational commitment [41], psychological mobbing [24], working conditions [43], burnout and depersonalization [44], school alienation and commitment [45], negative emotions and teaching quality [34], emotional exhaustion [46], leadership styles [47], organizational health. Finally, [32] according to the results of a study that has examined the power sources used by school principals and the professional burnout and alienation levels of teachers, it has been determined that there is a relationship between power sources and alienation. Based on research, we can think that alienation from work is affected by negative stimuli and that alienation is related to the mental health of the individual. Based on the literature and related research, it can be concluded that the power sources used by school principals affect the level of work alienation of teachers.
Studies have shown that work alienation is related to organizational health, cynicism, job stress, and teaching quality [34,48,49,51]. After alienation from work, there is a decrease in job satisfaction, work motivation, morale, performance, and productivity in individuals. Thus, psychological problems arise in individuals [4]. Alienation begins with anxiety and stress [29]. Therefore, anxious individuals are more likely to become alienated from work. A study concluded that teachers experience alienation in different dimensions and at different levels [36]. In this context, it can be thought that alienation differs from person to person. It may be easier for anxious individuals to become alienated from work. Some employees with the same conditions in the same workplace may experience burnout, while others may not [53]. Individuals' constant anxiety is an important factor in alienation from work. Employees with high trait anxiety are often in a state of worry. This anxiety leads individuals to burnout [54]. Burned-out individuals are more likely to experience anxiety [31]. In this context, it can be thought that anxiety may cause alienation from work. There have been studies in the literature that mostly external factors cause alienation from work [38,41,43,47,50]. However, studies on work alienation caused by the individual's emotional state are very rare [46]. Therefore, in this research, it is supported that managers can cause alienation from work, and it is examined that the individual's emotional state can also cause alienation from work. In this context, teachers' anxiety levels may cause alienation from work.
Anxiety is the distressed and anxious mood seen in individuals in the face of negative situations [54,55]. Withdrawal of support, negative expectations, internal contradiction, and the feeling of uncertainty are the main causes of anxiety [55]. Responsibilities in the work environment, social interaction, and work problems can cause anxiety [54,56,57]. Anxiety is common among teachers [33,57,58,59]. Teachers experiencing anxiety may experience uneasiness, avoidance, social mismatch, and distrust [60] because anxiety can negatively affect the mental health of individuals [61,62,63,64]. Anxiety in individuals can be categorized into two: state anxiety and trait anxiety. State anxiety is temporary anxiety that occurs at a certain time under certain conditions. Trait anxiety, on the other hand, occurs as a result of making sense of interpreting events and situations without certain conditions [54,65]. Stress is the main factor that increases individuals' state and trait anxiety. High stress and anxiety cause decreased productivity, restlessness, and increased job dissatisfaction in employees [28]. For this reason, teachers who experience anxiety may also have problems in their organizational behavior. Additionally, teachers experiencing anxiety may have negative reflections on themselves and their environment [33,57].
There are studies conducted with anxiety as a variable in the literature. Teacher anxiety [57,58,59] has proven to be related to, well-being [64], life satisfaction [61], psychological resilience and stress [62,63], emotional exhaustion, and depersonalization [54]. Additionally, [66] concluded that trait anxiety is negatively related to job satisfaction and positively related to the intention to leave. When research on anxiety is examined, studies have generally been conducted on administrator anxiety, teacher candidates' anxiety, and teacher anxiety [56,68,69]. There is little research directly related to teacher anxiety [57,58,59]. These studies argue that teachers are more concerned about workload and stress. After an examination of the literature, no research was found indicating that managers could create anxiety in employees. Therefore, this study examines whether the organizational power used by administrators may cause anxiety in teachers.
Many negative stimuli in the work environment can trigger anxiety [54]. There may need to be a negative stimulus for anxiety and alienation to occur. This negative stimulus can be coercive and legal force. Especially coercive power is harmful to employees because it is used to punish employees [28]. Coercive power creates fear in employees [6]. Individuals experience anxiety in stressful environments [33,54,59,70]. Stress is associated with alienation from work [51]. In this context, coercive power can cause anxiety and alienation from work. It may be easier for anxious individuals to become alienated from work. A large proportion of teachers reporting stress, depression, anxiety, and burnout state social and psychological reasons arising from negative situations [34]. In this context, [8] social power theory may be effective in teachers' alienation from work and constant anxiety. Individuals' constant anxiety can increase their alienation from work because anxiety increases burnout [31,53,54]. There are studies in the literature on the variables of power, work alienation, and trait anxiety. [68] concluded that there is a relationship between manager anxiety and power resources. [32] concluded that there is a relationship between power resources and work alienation. In their study, [66] concluded that state and trait anxiety had a negative, moderate relationship with job satisfaction, and state and trait anxiety had a positive, moderate relationship with the intention to leave the job. [71] found that productivity was negatively related to anxiety and alienation. [46] concluded in their study that emotional burnout increases work alienation. In short, it is thought that there is a relationship between the variables of power, anxiety, and work alienation. Based on the relevant literature and research, it is determined that teachers' trait anxiety level has a mediating role in the effect of the power resources used by school principals on the level of work alienation of teachers according to teachers’ perceptions.
This research claims that administrators may create anxiety in teachers. It has been pointed out that alienation from work can be caused by managers, and anxiety experienced by the individual can also cause alienation from work. Since there are not enough studies in the literature addressing the relationship between anxiety and work alienation, an important step will be taken with this research. This study was conducted to be an important source of literature for school principals to use their power resources correctly and effectively in achieving the goals of educational organizations, not to create anxiety and alienation in teachers, and ultimately to achieve organizational goals without interruption. There is no study examining the relationship between the power resources used by school principals and teachers' trait anxiety, the absence of a study examining the relationship between teachers' trait anxiety and work alienation, and the mediating role of teachers' trait anxiety level in the relationship between the power resources used by school principals and teachers' level of work alienation, according to teachers' perceptions. The fact that there is no study examining this in the literature makes this study important. In line with the research, the following hypotheses have been put forward.
H:1 There is a relationship between the power resources used by school principals and teachers' levels of alienation from work.
H: 2. There is a relationship between teachers' constant anxiety and their level of alienation from work.
H:3 There is a relationship between the power sources used by school principals and trait anxiety.
H:4 Teachers' trait anxiety level has a mediating role in the relationship between the power resources used by school principals and the level of work alienation of teachers.

2. Materials and Methods

In this part of the research, there are explanations about the research model, research population and sample, data collection tools, data collection process, and data analysis.

2.1. Research Design

Relational screening method, a quantitative method, was used in this study, which examined the mediating role of teachers' trait anxiety in the relationship between the power resources used by school principals and the level of work alienation of teachers. The relational scanning method is used to determine the relationships between variables and find cause-and-effect predictions [72]. To determine the mediating role, power resources were used as the independent variable, work alienation as the dependent variable, and trait anxiety as the mediator variable. The model for the research is presented in Figure 1.

2.2. Population and Sample

The population of this study consists of 1300 teachers working in 126 official primary schools affiliated with the Ministry of National Education in Aziziye, Palandöken, and Yakutiye districts, which are the central districts of Erzurum Province, in the 2023-2024 academic year. Simple random sampling method was used for the sample of the research, which gives each sampling unit in the universe an equal and independent chance of being selected and has a high power of representing the universe [72]. In this context, 400 teachers were reached with a 95% confidence level.

2.3. Data Collection

Organizational Power Scale in Schools: The Organizational Power Scale (OÖGÖ), developed by [73], consists of a total of 37 items, including 5 sub-dimensions. Each item in the scale is answered on a five-point Likert type. The answers given were (1) Never, (2) Very rarely, (3) Sometimes, (4) Mostly, (5) Always. The reliability study of OÖGÖ was conducted by [73]. Accordingly, the Cronbach Alpha internal consistency coefficient for the "Legal Power" factor is 0.84. These coefficients are α = 0.89 for the second factor, "Reward Power", α = 0.91 for the third factor, "Coercive Power", and α = 0.94 for the fourth factor, "Expertise Power", and the fifth factor, "Charisma Power" type. In short, the α coefficients for the factors vary between 0.84 and 0.94. In this research, α values vary between 0.82-0.95 for five dimensions. Calculated internal consistency coefficients show that the reliability of the scale is high. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied and the fit values (GFI:1, CFI:1, RMSEA:0.063, CMIN/DF:2.598) were found to be at an acceptable level. A total score cannot be obtained on the organizational power resources scale in schools.
Work Alienation Scale: The scale developed by [74] was adapted into Turkish by [75] as a part of his doctoral thesis. The work alienation scale, consisting of 8 items, has a five-point Likert structure. Responses to the scale items are as follows: "(5) I strongly agree, (4) I agree, (3) I am unsure, (2) I disagree, (1) I strongly disagree." In his adaptation study, [75] examined the scale as a single factor and calculated the reliability value as 0.96 in his reliability analysis. As a result of factor analysis, it was seen that the factor load values of the scale items varied between .843 and .900. The average explained variance value was calculated as .762. In this research, the α value was calculated as 91. The calculated α value shows that the scale is reliable. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied and some fit values (GFI: ,889, CFI: ,874, RMSEA: 0,140) were found to be at an acceptable level.
State and Trait Anxiety: Inventory was developed by Spielberger and adapted into Turkish by [65]. The scale consists of 40 items and two different scales [65]. The Trait Anxiety subscale used in this study consists of 20 items. Seven items in the scale are reverse coded. It measures the level of anxiety people generally feel [65]. The answers given to the Trait Anxiety Scale are (1) Almost never, (2) Sometimes, (3) A lot of the time and (4) Almost always. The reliability coefficients of the trait anxiety scale vary between .83 and .87, and the test-retest reliability coefficients vary between .71 and .86. The item reliability coefficients of the scale vary between .34 and .72 [67]. In this research, the α value of the scale was calculated as 92. The calculated α value shows that the scale is reliable. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied and the fit values (GFI:,866, CFI:,882, RMSEA:0,73, CMIN/DF:3,144) were found to be at an acceptable level.

2.4. Data Analysis

Since the prerequisite for applying parametric tests is to ensure the normality of the distribution [72], the normality test was first performed. For a normal distribution, the skewness and kurtosis values should be -1. +1 with. It has been stated that it would be sufficient to have values in the range [76]. Accordingly, skewness and kurtosis values were calculated, and it was determined that the skewness and kurtosis values of all variables were between -1 and +1 and the distribution of the data was normal. According to this result, it was decided to perform parametric tests. In the analysis of research data; arithmetic mean, standard deviation, correlation analysis, and regression analysis were used. SPSS Hayes Process extension was used to calculate the mediation role. In this method, mediation effect analysis is performed with 5000 resamplings, using the bootstrap technique. Model 4 is used in the mediation model. According to Model 4, in the first stage, the effect of the independent variable on the mediator variable is examined and the effect is expected to be significant. In the second stage, the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable is examined and the total effect value is found. In the third stage, the effect of the independent variable and the mediator variable on the dependent variable is examined. As a result of the combined impact analysis, direct impact and indirect impact values are found. If the lower and upper limit (CI) values in the 95% confidence interval of the indirect effect results do not include zero (0), a mediation effect can be mentioned [77]. The degree of statistical significance was accepted as p<0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Demographic Characteristics of the Sample

Demographic information about the teachers who constitute the sample of the study is presented in Table 1.
When the values given in Table 1 are examined, the teachers participating in the research consist of 221 (55.3%) female and 179 (44.8%) male teachers according to gender variable. According to the professional seniority variable, there are 35 (8.8) teachers with 1-5 years' tenure, 77 (19.3) teachers with 5-10 years' tenure, 150 (37.5) teachers with 10-20 years' tenure, and 138 (37.5) teachers with 20 and above years' tenure. 34.5) appears to be a teacher. According to the education level variable, it is seen that 356 (89.0) teachers have an undergraduate education level, and 44 (11.0) teachers have a postgraduate education level.

3.2. Means and standard deviations of variables

The mean and standard deviation values of the power sources, work alienation, and trait anxiety variables are presented in Table 2.
In the analysis of arithmetic mean values in the organizational power supply scale and work alienation scale, the range of 1.00-1.79 is "very low", the range of 1.80-2.59 is "low", the range of 2.60-3.39 is "medium", the range of 3.40-4.19 is "high", the range of 4.20-5.00 is "high". was determined as "very high". Although different classifications are used in scoring the trait anxiety scale, it is seen that the score range of 40-59 indicates moderate anxiety [67].
When Table 2 was examined, we found that the teachers participating in the study had the highest means in the dimension of expert power (x̄ = 3.95) and the lowest means in the dimension of coercive power (x̄ = 2.04), according to the organizational power resources sub-variable. It was concluded that the means for the other sub-dimensions were reward power (x̄ = 3.74), legal power (x̄ = 3.74), and charismatic power (x̄ = 3.69), respectively. We found that the anxiety levels of the teachers participating in the research were at a medium level (x̄ = 40.52) according to the trait anxiety variable. We found that the mean of the work alienation variable was low (x̄ = 1.94).

3.3. Relationships Between Power, Alienation and Anxiety

Relationships Between Power, Alienation and Anxiety are presented in Table 3.
Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (r) was used to calculate the relationships between variables. Correlation coefficients are interpreted as "high" in the range of ".70-1.00", "medium" in the range of ".69-.30" and "low" in the range of .29 and less [72].
When Table 3 is examined, it is seen that there are significant relationships between organizational power resources, trait anxiety, and work alienation variables.
There is a negative low-level significant relationship between the work alienation variable and reward power (r=-264, p<.01), a positive moderately significant relationship between work alienation and coercive power (r=576, p<.01), a negative, moderately significant relationship between work alienation and expert power (r=-503, p<.01), a negative, moderately significant relationship between work alienation and charismatic power (r=-513, p<.01), a positive, moderately significant relationship (r=647, p<.01) between trait anxiety and work alienation.
There is a positive low significant relationship between trait anxiety and legitimate power (r = .169, p<.01), a negative low significant relationship between trait anxiety and reward power (r = -228, p<.01), trait anxiety, a positive moderate relationship between trait anxiety and coercive power (r=497, p<.01), a negative moderate significant relationship between trait anxiety and expert power (r=-338, p<.01), a negative, moderately significant relationship between trait anxiety and charismatic power (r=-417, p<.01), and a positive, moderately significant relationship between trait anxiety and work alienation (r=647, p<.01).

3.4. The mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between power resources and work alienation.

The research findings examining the mediating effect of teachers' trait anxiety level on the effect of the power resources used by school principals on teachers' work alienation level are presented in Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, and Table 8. Additionally, the mediation model analysis is presented in Figure 2.
Hayes' bootstrap method, a current method, was used to examine the mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between power resources and work alienation. In this method, mediation effect analysis is performed with 5000 resamplings. According to [77] in the model 4 mediating role, in the first stage, the effect of the independent variable on the mediator variable is examined and the effect is expected to be significant. In the second stage, the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable is examined and the total effect value is found. In the third stage, the effect of the independent variable and mediator variable on the dependent variable is examined. As a result of the combined impact analysis, direct impact and indirect impact values are found. If the lower and upper limit (CI) values in the 95% confidence interval of the episodic effect results do not include zero (0), a mediation effect can be mentioned. In this regard, since the total score could not be obtained from the power resources scale, the mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between the power resources sub-dimensions legal power, reward power, coercive power, expert power, charismatic power, and work alienation was examined one by one. The mediation effect analysis phase is presented in Figure 2.
Analysis phase of the model
  1- Power supplies  Effect on trait anxiety (a pathway)
  2- Constant anxiety  Effect on Work Alienation (b pathway)
  3- Power supplies  Effect on alienation from work (c pathway-Total effect)
  4- The combined effect of power sources and trait anxiety on work alienation. (c’ Indirect effect)
When Table 4 is examined, legal power has a significant positive effect on work alienation (b: .069, p: 169) and trait anxiety (b: .169, p: 001). To examine the mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between legal power and work alienation, the combined effects of trait anxiety and legal power on work alienation were examined. In this respect, since the indirect effect of trait anxiety (b: .110, CI: .035, .183) confidence interval values do not include zero, trait anxiety has a mediating role in the relationship between legal power and work alienation.
When Table 5 is examined, coercive power has a significant positive effect on work alienation (b: .576, p: 000) and trait anxiety (b: .497, p: 000). In addition, trait anxiety significantly affects work alienation (b: .480, p: 000) in a positive way. When the mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between coercive power and work alienation is examined, the indirect effect of trait anxiety (b: .238, CI: .184 .294) does not include zero, so trait anxiety has a mediating role in the relationship between coercive power and work alienation.
When Table 6 is examined, reward power has a significantly negative effect on work alienation (b: -.264, p: 000) and trait anxiety (b: -.228, p: 000). To examine the mediating role of trait anxiety, trait anxiety was added to the model and its effect on work alienation was examined together with reward power. In this model, since the indirect effect of trait anxiety (b:-.141, CI: -.206, -.077) confidence interval values do not include zero, trait anxiety has a mediating role in the relationship between reward power and work alienation.
When Table 7 is examined, expert power has a significant negative effect on work alienation (b: -.264, p: 000) and trait anxiety (b: -.228, p: 000). To examine the mediating role of trait anxiety, trait anxiety was added to the model and its effect on work alienation along with expert power was examined. In this model, the indirect effect of trait anxiety (b: -.182, CI: -.241 -.123) does not include zero confidence interval values, so trait anxiety has a mediating role in the relationship between expert power and work alienation.
When Table 8 is examined, charismatic power has a significant negative effect on work alienation (b: -.513, p: 000) and trait anxiety (b: -.417, p: 000). To examine the mediating role of trait anxiety, trait anxiety was added to the model and its effect on work alienation along with charismatic power was examined. In this model, the indirect effect of trait anxiety (b: -.218, CI: -.277 -.159) confidence interval values do not include zero, so trait anxiety has a mediating role in the relationship between charismatic power and work alienation.

4. Discussion

The findings of the study that investigates the mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between the power resources used by school principals and the level of work alienation of teachers, have been examined, the results have been discussed, and finally, some suggestions have been presented to the researchers.
According to the results of the research, school principals mostly use the sub-dimensions of power resources of expert power, reward power, legal power, charismatic power, and coercive power, respectively. Accordingly, it is concluded that school principals use their expertise power the most among the power resources sub-dimensions. When the literature is examined [1,18,21,22,25,32,78], it is seen that similar results have been observed. However, there have also been studies in the literature with different results; studies in which the reward power is the highest [9,13,24,79,80], studies in which the legal power is the highest [81], studies in which charismatic power is the highest [10,14,20,82], and the studies with the highest frequency of connection power [18]. The greater use of expert power by school principals may be an indication that school principals' professional knowledge, equipment, and experience are sufficient because expert power is based on individuals' knowledge, experience, and abilities [83]. In this context, it can be considered that school principals improve themselves in matters such as field knowledge, personal rights, and professional knowledge. In addition, school principals can be perceived by teachers as experts, guides, and leaders. This may have a positive impact on teachers' organizational behavior. In this way, organizational goals can be achieved more easily.
According to the results of the research, it is determined that school principals used coercive power the least among the power resources sub-dimensions. When the literature is examined [78,22,80,10,21,82,23,14]
[10,14,21,22,23,78,80,82], it is seen that similar results have been obtained. Coercive power is based on the manager forcing his subordinate to do the job by using pressure and threats. Coercive power manifests itself through punishment, strict control, and harsh warnings, and this has negative effects [83]. Coercive power creates resentment in employees and causes employees to develop negative attitudes towards the organization [84]. Uneasiness, stress, and anger may occur in employees who are exposed to coercive power. As a result, individuals' belonging to the organization may weaken and individuals may become hostile to the organization. School principals did not prefer to use coercive force because teachers and the organization would be negatively affected by the use of coercive force. The fact that school principals avoid coercive power is a positive development for schools and teachers because coercive power is seen more in the despotic management approach (85).
According to the results of the research, it can be concluded that the high reward power is that the successful work and desired behavior of the teachers are valued and appreciated by the school principals. Because the essence of reward power is to ensure that the desired behavior of employees is reinforced with rewards and that the work is done [4]. The reward system is used to increase employee performance. Since the reward will bring material and moral gain to the employees, employees can show more organizational performance. In addition, organizational performance may increase because the use of the reward system can encourage other teachers. After all, reward elements such as pay, leave, and promotion encourage employees [7].
Legal power is a formal authority derived from the ruler's office. With this formal authority, subordinates are legitimately guided by managers [84]. A high level of legal power may indicate that school principals do not act autonomously and continue their management activities by taking into account the legal regulations. Laws and rules protect employees from the arbitrary practices of managers. Although this situation is sometimes positive for the organization, excessive use of legal power harms the school climate as it negatively affects human relations. In addition, it prevents the free thoughts of employees by ensuring excessive regulation in the organization [83]. Different and original ideas for the benefit of the organization may be involved in laws and rules. In short, in environments where there is no free thought, there may be problems in the process of schools realizing the common vision. Rules and laws should be a tool for organizations, not an end. Rules and laws should facilitate and support the achievement of organizational goals, and managers should pay attention to this point. In this context, the legal use of force must be appropriate and balanced [3]. Otherwise, conflict, low motivation, and dissatisfaction will occur among employees [12].
The manager's personality traits and behaviors reflect his charisma [4]. Managers with charismatic power are respected and taken as examples and models [83]. High charismatic power may indicate that school principals are perceived as effective, respected, and charismatic by teachers. In this context, school principals' display of charismatic power and leadership is important in directing teachers to organizational goals, as they will be taken as a model by teachers.
Work alienation is when individuals feel alienated from the organization and their interest in work decreases [86]. Alienation affects the entire life of individuals [36]. Individual consequences such as social and cognitive disorders can be seen in individuals alienated from work, as well as organizational consequences such as decreased organizational commitment, organizational efficiency, and job satisfaction [37]. For educational organizations, alienation from work can lead to teachers' disinterest in school and schools' inefficiency [87]. In a similar study, [45] concluded that alienation from school has a negative impact on the learning processes and a decrease in the commitment of students and teachers. According to the results of the research, it was determined that the level of alienation of teachers from work was low. In this context, it can be considered that teachers enjoy and are satisfied with the work they do. In support, [11] concluded that there is a negative relationship between job satisfaction and work alienation. The low level of alienation from work is a positive development for schools because teachers who are happy with their work will be able to make more efforts to achieve organizational goals. When the literature was examined [38,88,89], a similar result was reached. However, in different studies, it has been determined that teachers' perception of the level of alienation from work is at a medium level [39,40].
According to the results of the research, it was determined that teachers' trait anxiety levels were at a medium level. [69] reached similar results in their study with prospective teachers. Trait anxiety is the tendency of individuals to worry. Individuals with high levels of trait anxiety generally feel unhappy and restless [54,65]. In support, [64] found a negative relationship between well-being and trait anxiety. Anxious teachers may have problems in the teaching process because they will be unhappy and restless. Teachers' mental health affects teaching quality [30]. Social mismatch and communication problems may be observed in teachers with high levels of trait anxiety. This situation may also harm the organizational climate because they may be in constant fear and anxiety and there may be problems in intra-organizational relations. Additionally, an anxious teacher may project his or her anxiety and stress onto students. In short, trait anxiety may have negative reflections on teachers, students, and the organization. For this reason, the reasons for anxiety in teachers should be investigated and precautions should be taken by school principals. Otherwise, it may become difficult for teachers, who are the basic building blocks of schools, to achieve organizational goals. There is no research on teachers' trait anxiety in the literature. The research results can be supported by new research.
When the relationship between the power resources used by school principals and teachers' level of work alienation was examined, it was determined that there was a negative significant relationship between the sub-dimensions of power resources, namely reward power, expert power, charismatic power, and work alienation. [32] also reached a similar conclusion. According to supporting research, charismatic power, reward, and expert power increase job commitment and provide job satisfaction [1,2,11,14]. The use of reward power, charismatic power, and expert power was perceived positively by teachers and their level of alienation from work decreased because expert power and charismatic power can give teachers confidence, while reward power can increase their motivation to work. The reward system used by the administration may reflect the school administration's attitude toward the employee's performance. The use of reward power by school principals may indicate that employees' good work and behavior are appreciated. Rewards increase employee performance by motivating employees and can keep employees in the organization. [43] also concluded that the reward system can prevent employees from becoming alienated from work. In this context, reward power reduces employees' alienation from work. Supporting and guiding teachers by administrators reduces work alienation and teachers leaving the profession [36,90,91]. In addition, the empowering leadership style positively affects work alienation [47]. In this context, school principals' display of expertise, and guidance and support to employees reduced alienation from work. Charismatic leaders are perceived by teachers as the epitome of confidence, a role model, and someone who motivates them [8]. In this context, employees may admire school principals who exhibit charismatic power. As a result of this admiration and trust, employees can enjoy the work environment. In support of this, [92] found a significant relationship between charismatic leadership and job satisfaction in his research. Work alienation of individuals who are satisfied with their jobs may also decrease. A positive significant relationship was found between work alienation and coercive power. [32] also concluded that coercive power increases alienation from work. This shows that as the use of coercive power increases, teachers' level of alienation from work will increase. Excessive strain and punishment of employees create an environment of distrust and can reduce employee productivity and morale. Oppressive and authoritarian management can cause alienation from work. Work alienation can have devastating organizational and individual consequences. Work alienation is an undesirable situation in terms of achieving organizational goals. Therefore, school principals should be careful when using coercive power. Otherwise, productivity and commitment may decrease as teachers' level of alienation from work increases. No significant relationship is found between legal power and work alienation.
When the relationship between the power sources used by school principals and trait anxiety is examined, a negative significant relationship is found between expert power, charismatic power, reward power, and trait anxiety. Reward power, charismatic power, and expert power positively affect teachers' anxiety. Rewards have a positive impact on employees' job satisfaction because they make individuals happy. The important thing here is that the reward and the individual's expectations match. In this context, individuals whose expectations are met, who are satisfied with their jobs, and who are happy tend to be less anxious. Additionally, rewards can prevent anxiety by making individuals happy. The relationship between manager and subordinate is more sincere and genuine with expert power and charismatic power. Sincerity and genuineness provide trust in the organization as well as in bilateral relations. Risky and uncertain situations are the source of anxiety. Managers can prevent anxiety and burnout by reducing uncertainty [54]. In situations where there are risky situations and uncertainty for employees, trust in the manager can put employees at ease. Expert power and charismatic power are based on a relationship of trust [2]. Therefore, school principals' use of expert and charismatic power and employees' trust in their managers may be a factor in reducing their anxiety. In addition, since expert and charismatic school principals are more experienced, knowledgeable, and respected, their influence on teachers is high. It positively affects teachers' emotions, thoughts, and behaviors. This may reduce or prevent anxiety by positively affecting teachers' well-being. Expertise and charismatic power may also facilitate teachers' coping with anxiety because teachers can manage the process better as they will receive support from administrators. Studies on support have concluded that administrator and social support reduce teacher anxiety [33,54].
A significant positive relationship is found between trait anxiety, and coercive power and legal power. The use of coercive power and legal power constantly increases the level of anxiety in teachers because it can create pressure and fear. Anxiety is defined as "a feeling of tension with an unknown cause, usually arising from the thought that something bad will happen" [93]. Excessive normativity creates tension in the organization [83]. In this regard, excessive use of legal power may create tension in teachers. It can cause anxiety and tension. Overly strict school principals can punish teachers for the slightest mistake because they cannot be flexible. In this case, teachers may be overly sensitive to rules and laws to avoid punishment. This sensitivity can cause tension and anxiety in individuals. Anxiety disorders may occur because individuals become stressed and tense when exposed to fear and pressure [70]. Additionally, humiliating behavior and punishment can create anxiety in individuals. [60] argued that the source of anxiety is negative situations. In short, legal power and coercive power can be a source of anxiety for teachers. The anxiety of teachers is reflected in the organization and its stakeholders. It may lead teachers to engage in counterproductive behavior by reducing teachers' performance. It may reduce the synergy of the organization by negatively affecting the organizational climate. To achieve organizational goals, teachers' trait anxiety levels may need to be low. Therefore, school principals may need to pay attention to the use of coercive and legal force.
A significant positive relationship is found between trait anxiety and work alienation. As the level of trait anxiety increases, teachers' level of alienation from work also increases. Studies have found a positive relationship between anxiety and burnout [31,53,54]. Therefore, the research result is consistent with the literature. When looking at the individual consequences of work alienation, negative consequences such as depression, addiction, and irregular lifestyle can be seen [37]. In addition, alienation from work negatively affects the health of employees, causing low morale and possibly leading to some psychological diseases [94,95]. These results are related to the general mood of the individual. Since anxiety reflects the general mood of the individual, high anxiety increases alienation from work. A supporting study concludes that depression and emotional variability are positively associated with work alienation [95]. A teacher who is in a constant state of anxiety may be less sensitive to his/her environment and problems and may experience communication problems with students and other teachers. This situation may cause conflicts; hence teachers do not enjoy the work environment. In this way, the individual can isolate himself from the social environment, work environment, and students. With this detachment, alienation from work can occur. In short, it is important for teachers to enjoy their work. A study concludes that improving the work environment reduces teacher anxiety (Agyapong et al., 2022). Thus, organizational goals can be achieved more easily.
The mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between the power resources used by school principals and teachers' work alienation levels is examined and it is determined that trait anxiety has a mediating role. Since teachers perceive the use of expertise, charisma, and reward power as positive, the level of trait anxiety and alienation from work decreases. Teachers with low levels of trait anxiety also have lower levels of work alienation, so trait anxiety plays a mediating role. In addition, the use of coercive force increases the level of alienation from work as it negatively affects teachers. Since teachers with high levels of trait anxiety have a higher level of alienation from work, trait anxiety plays a mediating role. In short, the power resources used by school principals affect the level of alienation of teachers from work. Teachers' trait anxiety levels also increase or decrease this effect.

5. Conclusions

The research was conducted with a multidisciplinary approach. It is an important resource for fields such as social sciences, educational sciences, and psychology. Research results are also important for researchers. With this research, original results were reached, such as organizational power resources are related to trait anxiety, there is a relationship between trait anxiety and work alienation, and trait anxiety has a mediating role in the relationship between power resources and work alienation. For the first time in this research, it was pointed out that managers could create anxiety. It has been supported that alienation from work can be caused by managers, and the anxiety experienced by the individual can also cause alienation from work. Some measures such as giving teachers the necessary value, asking for their opinions on decisions, strengthening communication through social events, and providing incentives for work with a reward system, can be taken to minimize teachers' constant anxiety levels and work alienation. Administrators' use of personality-based power resources that support human relations can be positive in terms of organizational behavior and teachers' mental health. In addition, situations of uncertainty, which is one of the most important reasons for anxiety, should not be included and school principals should inform teachers on every issue. For school principals to use their power resources better, postgraduate education and in-service training can be encouraged. The Ministry of National Education can create communities among school principals, similar to teacher communities, and evaluate the experiences regarding the use of power in these communities. In addition, if there is cooperation between the Ministry of National Education and universities, and mentoring support is provided to school principals by academics, administrators will use their power effectively.

6. Limitations

The research was applied to primary school teachers using the quantitative method. Research can be improved by applying different methods, different samples, and different school levels.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.A and İ.Y.; methodology, A.A and İ.Y.; software, A.A.; validation, A.A and İ.Y., formal analysis, A.A.; investigation, A.A and İ.Y.; resources, A.A and İ.Y.; data curation, A.A and İ.Y.; writing—original draft preparation, A.A and İ.Y.; writing—review and editing, A.A and İ.Y.; visualization, A.A and İ.Y.; supervision, A.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declara tion of Helsinki and was approved by the Ethics Committee of Atatürk University (protocol code E-56785782-050.02.04-2400126864 and 1 April 2024).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all participants involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available upon request.

Acknowledgments

We thank the teachers who participated in the research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Junamiah, J., See and L. P., & Bashawir, A. G. (2015). Effect of manager’s bases of power on employee’s job satisfaction: An empirical study of satisfaction with supervision. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, 3(2), 1-14.
  2. Lunenburg, F. C. (2012). “Power and leadership: an influence process.” International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration, 15(1), 1-9.
  3. Singh, A., Eng, P., Asce, F. (2009). Organizational power in perspective. Leadership and Management in Engineering, 9(4), 165-176. [CrossRef]
  4. Aytürk, N. (2019). Organizational behavior: organizational theories and applications (1th ed.).Nobel.
  5. McShane, S. L., & Von Glinow, M. A. (2015). Organizational behavior (3th ed.). McGraw Hill.
  6. Özkalp, E., & Kırel, Ç. (2010). Power and politics in organizations, in Organizational behavior (4 th ed.) (545-572). Crop.
  7. Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational Behavior. (18th Ed.), Global Edition. Pearson.
  8. French, J., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
  9. Çevik, D. (2022). The relationship between the power resources used by school administrators and teachers' job satisfaction (Iğdır province example) (Thesis no.742062) [Master's Thesis, Van Yüzüncü Yıl University-Van]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  10. Lee, K. L. , & Low, G. T. (2008). The exercise of social power and the effect of ethnicity: Evidence from Malaysian’s industrial companies. International Business Research, 1(2), 53-65. [CrossRef]
  11. Nooradi, M., Nia, H. B. & Ouliaey, A. (2017). Are manager's bases of power related to job satisfaction?, Journal of Management and Accounting Studies, 5(3), 71-75. [CrossRef]
  12. Yılmaz, K., & Altınkurt, Y. (2012). The relationship between the power resources used by school administrators and teachers' job satisfaction. Kastamonu Education Journal, 20(2), 385-402.
  13. Çatalyürek, H. B. (2022). Examining the relationship between the power sources used by principals and the motivation and organizational commitment levels of teachers according to the perceptions of classroom teachers (Thesis no.754698) [Master's Thesis, Çukurova University-Adana]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  14. Vazifeh, Z., Keivani, S., Poudineh, M., Sadegh, M., & Rad, S. (2014). Presentation of a model for interpretation of manager’s five power sources and their impact on personel’s organizational commitment. International Samanm Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 2(2), 62-79.
  15. Cubay, P. P. C. (2020). Public secondary school administrators’ leadership styles, power bases and teachers’ job satisfaction . Journal of World Englishes and Educational Practices, 2(2), 36-45.
  16. Pantonıou, E., & Brinia, V. (2016). Hihg school principals as leaders: styles and sources of power. İnternational Journal of Educational Management, 30(4), 520-535. [CrossRef]
  17. Eroy, S. (2019). The effect of perceived leader power sources on job performance, job stress and intention to leave (Thesis no. 572636) [Master's Thesis, Hasan Kalyoncu University]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  18. Graham, T. W. (2015). The relationship between the high school principal's use of power and the teachers' self-perception of professionalism [Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia]. Mospace. [CrossRef]
  19. Yıldırım, M., & Ertürk, M. İ. (2022). The relationship between the power resources used by the manager and job satisfaction, turnover tendency and job performance: a qualitative research on customer relations employees. International Journal of the Academy of Social Sciences, 4(10), 860-885. [CrossRef]
  20. Girgin, S. (2019). The relationship between teachers' organizational silence levels and the power sources used by school administrators (Thesis no.640339) [Master's Thesis, Istanbul Sabahattin Zaim University-Istanbul]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  21. Süslü, A. Z. (2022). The relationship between the power sources used by school principals working in secondary education institutions and the organizational silence behaviors of teachers (Muğla province Menteşe district example) (Thesis no.743148) [Master's Thesis, Muğla Sıtkı Kocaman University-Muğla]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  22. Çelik, Y., & Ayık, A. (2023). The power of the power sources used by school principals to predict teachers' levels of organizational creativity and organizational cynicism, Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 12(1), 119-131. [CrossRef]
  23. Özhan, T. (2016). The relationship between the power sources used by school principals and teachers' views on organizational trust levels (Thesis no.441161) [Master's Thesis, Düzce University]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  24. Diş, O., & Ayik, A. (2016). The relationship between the power sources used by school administrators and the organizational climate. Academic View International Refereed Journal of Social Sciences, (58), 499-518.
  25. Uzun, M. (2019). The relationship between the organizational power resources used by administrators and teachers' dedication to work (Kahramanmaraş Province example) (Thesis no.544090) [Master's Thesis, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University-Kahramanmaraş]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  26. Cemaloğlu, N. (2019). Pin code of the management (3.th ed.).Pegem academy.
  27. Faiz, N.S. (2013). Impact of Manager’s Reward Power and Coercive Power on Employee’s Job Satisfaction: A Comparative Study of Public and Private Sector. International Journal of Management and Business Research, 3, 383-392. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:53693299.
  28. Mutlucan, N.C. (2019). Organizational behavior with case studies. (1th ed.). Beta.
  29. Adibifar, K., & Monson, M. (2020). Workplace: subjective alienation and ındividuals’ health, Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 9(3), 22-37. [CrossRef]
  30. Wu, D. (2020). Relationship between job burnout and mental health of teachers under work stress. Revista Argentina de Clínica Psicológica, 29(1), 310–315.
  31. Ding, Y., Qu, J., Yu, X., & Wang, S. (2014). The mediating effects of burnout on the relationship between anxiety symptoms and occupational stress among community healthcare workers in China: a cross-sectional study. PLoS ONE, 9(9) 1-7. Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107130.
  32. Tanriverdi, H. (2019). Determining the level of professional burnout and alienation of school principals according to the power resources of their units (Thesis no.578032) [Master's Thesis, Dumlupınar University-Kütahya]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  33. Agyapong, B., Obuobi-Donkor, G., Burback, L., & Wei, Y. (2022). Stress, burnout, anxiety and depression among teachers: A scoping review. International journal of environmental research and public health, 19(17), 10706. [CrossRef]
  34. Tsang, K. K. (2018). Teacher alienation in Hong Kong. Studies in thecultural politics of education, 39(3), 335-346. Doi: 10.1080/01596306.2016.1261084.
  35. Seeman, M. (1959). On the meaning of alienation, American Sociological Review, 24(6), 783-791. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2088565.
  36. Brooks, J. S., Hughes, R.M., & Brooks, M.C. (2008). Fear and trembling in the american high school: Educational reform and teacher alienation. Educational Policy, 22(1),45-62. [CrossRef]
  37. Donmez, B. (2020). Alienation from work. In N. Cemaloğlu & S. Özdemir (Eds.), Organizational behavior and management (553-576). Pegem.
  38. Altay, T., & Ayık, A. (2023). Examining the relationship between school climate, work alienation and organizational citizenship behaviors. Thrace Education Journal, 13(1), 711-734. [CrossRef]
  39. Avşar, D. (2019). The effect of school climate on the level of work alienation. (Thesis no.557237) [Master's Thesis, Istanbul Sebahattin Zaim University-Istanbul]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  40. Yazıcı, S. D. (2019). The relationship between perceived organizational climate and work alienation (Ministry of National Education example) (Thesis no.572057) [Master's Thesis, Ankara University-Ankara]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  41. Tummers, L. G. & Dulk, L. D. (2013). The effects of work alienation on organizational commitment, work effort and work-to-family enrichment. Journal of Nursing Management, 21, 850-859. [CrossRef]
  42. Zorgül, G. G. (2014). The relationship between psychological mobbing and alienation from work that primary school teachers are exposed to (The case of Avcılar district of Istanbul) (Thesis no.383906) [Master's Thesis, Bahçeşehir University]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  43. Shehada, M. , & Khafaje, N. (2015). The manifestation of organizational alienation of employees and its impact on work conditions. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 6(2), 82-86. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:146548796.
  44. Kirici, E., & Özkoç, A. G. (2017). The effect of tourist guides' burnout levels on work alienation tendencies. Journal of Travel and Hospitality Management, 14(1), 20-32. [CrossRef]
  45. Hascher, T., & Hadjar, A. (2018). School alienation–Theoretical approaches and educational research. Educational Research, 60(2), 171-188. [CrossRef]
  46. Khan, M., Jianguo D., Mann, A., Saleem, S., Boamah, K.B., Javed, U., & Usman, M. (2019). Rejuvenating The concept of work alienation through job demands-resources model and examining its relationship with emotional exhaustion and explorative and exploitative learning. Psychology Research and Behavior Management,(12),931-941. [CrossRef]
  47. Dash, S. S. , & Vohra, N. (2019). "The leadership of the school principal: Impact on teachers’ job crafting, alienation and commitment", Management Research Review, 42(3), 352-369. [CrossRef]
  48. Çevik, O. (2019). The effect of organizational health on work alienation. An application in Kahramanmaraş steel factories. (Thesis no.602114) [Master's Thesis, Selçuk University-Konya]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  49. Dogan, S., & Tekin, D. (2021). Work alienation and organizational cynism are anti-productive work impact on their behavior International Journal of Business, Economics and Management Perspectives, 6(5), 591-605. DOI : 10.29228/ijbemp.52581.
  50. Şimşek, Ö. (2022). The examination of the relationship between teachers' levels of organizational stress and work alienation (Thesis no.757317) [Master's Thesis, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University-Kahramanmaraş]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  51. Tipi, B. (2022). The effect of job stress on job satisfaction and work alienation in teachers: Ankara Yenimahalle district example (Thesis no.722427) [Master's Thesis, Gazi University-Ankara]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  52. Bag, C. (2023). A research on the relationship between workplace loneliness and work alienation. (Thesis no.779019) [Master's Thesis, Karabük University-Karabük]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  53. Koutsimani, P. , Montgomery, A. , & Georganta, K. (2019). The relationship between burnout, depression, and anxiety: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology,10, 1-19. [CrossRef]
  54. Turnipseed, D. L. (1998). Anxiety and burnout in the health care work environment. Psychol. Reports, 82, 627-642. Doi: 10.2466/pr0.1998.82.2.627.
  55. Cüceloğlu, D. (2004). Man and his behavior (basic concepts of psychology) (13th ed.) Remzi.
  56. Aydin, U.A. , Koç, M. , & Bir, Y. (2018). “A research on managers and anxiety in business life”, 26th National Management and Organization Congress, KTÜ, 10-12 May 2018.
  57. Coates, T. J., & Thoresen, C. E. (1976). Teacher anxiety: A review with recommendations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 159-184.http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543046002159.
  58. Corrente, M., Ferguson, K. & Bourgeault, I. (2022). Mental health experiences of teachers: A scoping review. Journal of Teaching and Learning, 16(1), 23–43. [CrossRef]
  59. Ferguson, K. , Frost, L. , & Hall, D. (2012). Predicting teacher anxiety, depression, and job satisfaction. Journal of Teaching and learnıng, 8(1), 27- 41. [CrossRef]
  60. Freeman, D. , & Freeman, J. (2012). Anxiety: A very short introduction. OUP Oxford.
  61. Çivilidağ, A. , Yanar, A. , Kızılırmak, B. , & Denizli, T. (2018). Examining professional self-esteem, trait anxiety and life satisfaction levels. Journal of Life Skills Psychology, 2 (3), 45-60. [CrossRef]
  62. Demir, T. (2018). The predictive power of perceived stress, psychological resilience and cognitive emotion regulation strategies in state and trait anxiety levels in healthcare professionals (Thesis no529636) [Master's Thesis, Istanbul Arel University-Istanbul]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  63. Karli, A. (2023). Examination of physical education teachers' stress perceptions and trait anxiety (Thesis no.786299) [Master's Thesis, Erciyes University-Kayseri]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  64. Tangör, B.B., & Curun, F. (2016). Individual differences as predictors of psychological well-being: authenticity, self-esteem, and trait anxiety. Journal of Education and Training Research, 5(4).1-13.
  65. Öner, N. , & Le Compte, A. (1985). State-trait/trait anxiety inventory handbook. (2th ed.) Boğaziçi.
  66. Karadağ A. Ö., & Diken, A. (2020). The effect of job satisfaction and anxiety level on intention to leave: an empirical research on bank employees. BDDK Banking and Financial Markets Journal, 14 (2), 175-204. [CrossRef]
  67. Öner, N. (2012). Examples of psychological tests used in Turkey: a reference source. (7th ed.). Bogazici University.
  68. Baydemir, A. (2022). Examining the relationship between school administrators' ability to use power resources and their anxiety levels. International Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 6(1), 56-79. DOİ: http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7213283.
  69. Pamuk, Y., Hamurcu, H., & Armağan, B. (2014). Examining of situational and continuous anxiety level of classroom teachers candidates (İzmir-Buca Sample). Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 3(2), 293-316. Doi: 10.14686/BUEFAD.201428183.
  70. Şahin, M. (2019). Fear, anxiety and anxiety disorders. Eurasian Journal of Researches in Social and Economics. 6(10), 117-135.
  71. Pestonjee, D. M., Singh, A. P. & Singh, Y. K. (1982). Productivity in relation to alienation and anxiety. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 18(1), 71-76. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27768751.
  72. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2014). Scientific research methods (16th Ed.). Pegem.
  73. Altınkurt, Y., & Yılmaz, K. (2013). Development of organizational power scale in schools: Validity and reliability study. E-International Journal of Educational Research, 4(4), 1-17.
  74. Nair, N., & Vohra, N. (2010). An exploration of factors predicting work alienation of knowledge workers. Management Decision, 48(4), 600-615. [CrossRef]
  75. Toklu, A. T. (2016). Examining the effect of occupational health and safety practices on employees' organizational commitment, work alienation and job performance. (Thesis no.445870).
  76. Doctoral Thesis, Gebze Technical University-Kocaeli]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  77. Leech, N. L., Barrett, K. C. , & Morgan, G. A. (2005). SPSS for Intermediate Statistics (2.bs.) Use and Interpretation, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Mahwah. [CrossRef]
  78. Hayes, A. F. (2022). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis, A Regression-based approach. New York: The Guilford Press.
  79. Adak, Y. (2023). The relationship between the organizational power sources used by school administrators and the organizational opposition behaviors of teachers (Thesis no.797416) [Master's Thesis, Dokuz Eylül University-İzmir]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  80. Kepenek, G. (2023). Power resources used by school principals as predictors of organizational creativity (Thesis no.781160) [Master's Thesis, Istanbul Kültür University-Istanbul]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  81. Deviren, I. , & Okçu, V. (2020). Examining the relationships between the organizational power resources used by primary school principals and teachers' organizational silence and motivation levels. İnternational Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research, 7(52), 915-932. [CrossRef]
  82. Bulut, S. (2019). The relationship between organizational power resources and psychological capital in schools with teachers (Thesis no.542974) [Master's Thesis, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University-Çanakkale]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  83. Odabaşı, S. (2021). The relationship between the power sources used by school administrators and the political behavior of teachers (Thesis no.676643) [Master's Thesis, Kocaeli University-Kocaeli]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  84. Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2012). Educational administration: theory, research, and practice (9th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
  85. Ergeneli, A. (2017). Organizational behavior: Organization and individual (1th. Ed.). Nobel.
  86. Aslanargun, E. (2021). Social power in organizations. (Memduhoğlu, H.B. & Yılmaz, K. Ed.) New approaches in management (4.th ed.) (227-254). Pegem.
  87. Hirschfeld, R. R., & Feild, H. S. (2000). Work centrality and work alienation: distinct aspects of a general commitment to work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(7), 789-800. [CrossRef]
  88. Eryılmaz, A. , & Burgaz, B. (2011). Organizational alienation levels of private and public high school teachers. Education and science, 36 (161), 271-286.
  89. Abbasli, K. (2018). Teachers' views on the relationship between organizational exclusion, work alienation and organizational cynicism (Thesis no.516925) [Doctoral Thesis, Hacettepe University-Ankara]. National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education.
  90. Gider, I. , & Okçu, V. (2022). The relationship between favoritism behaviors in school management and teachers' work alienation levels. Anatolian Journal of Educational Leadership and Teaching, 10(2),48-70. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ajeli/issue/74249/1128492.
  91. Schlichte, J., Yssel, N. & Merbler, J. (2005). Pathways to burnout: Case studies in teacher isolation and alienation. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 50(1), 35-40. [CrossRef]
  92. Villarreal, E. (2023). Analyzing teacher burnout through principal leadership behaviors, Drawn to the Flame Advances in Research on Teaching,(45),149-168. [CrossRef]
  93. Çankaya, B. Ö. (2019). A research to examine the relationship between managers' charismatic leadership characteristics and employees' job satisfaction. (Thesis no.583979) [Master's Thesis, Istanbul University-Istanbul]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  94. TDK. (2009). Current Turkish Vocabulary (10th Ed.). Turkish Language Society.
  95. Mohan, K. C., & Prasad, P. N. (2014), “Work alienation among the employees in ıt sector”, Parıpex- Indian Journal of Research, 3(5), 140-142. [CrossRef]
  96. Vinokurov, L.V., & Kozhina, A. A. (2020). The contribution of individual psychological features to the determination of the phenomenon of work alienation. Behavioral Sciences. 10(1):34. [CrossRef]
Preprints 120738 g001
Figure 1. Research model.
Figure 1. Research model.
Preprints 120738 g001
Preprints 120738 g002
Figure 2. Analysis phase of the model.
Figure 2. Analysis phase of the model.
Preprints 120738 g002
Table 1. Demographic Information of the Teachers Who Made Up the Sample of the Study.
Table 1. Demographic Information of the Teachers Who Made Up the Sample of the Study.
Variables Categories N %
Gender Female 221 55,2
Male 179 44,8
Education status Undergraduate 356 89,00
Postgraduate 44 11,00
Professional Year 1-5 Year 35 8,8
5-10 Year 77 19,3
10-20 Year 150 37,5
20 years and above 138 34,5
Total
400 100
* Tables may have a footer.
Table 2. Means and standard deviations of variables.
Table 2. Means and standard deviations of variables.
Variables Mean(x̄) Standard Deviation(S)
Legal Power 3.74 .73
Reward Power 3.75 .71
Coercive Power 2.04 .82
Expertise Power 3.95 .79
Charismatic Power 3.69 .91
Trait anxiety 40.52 .5
Alienation from Work 1.94 .86
Table 3. Correlation values of relationships between variables.
Table 3. Correlation values of relationships between variables.
Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1.Legal Power 1
2.Reward Power .336** 1
3.Coercive Power .242** -.315** 1
4.Expertise Power .252** .629** -.498** 1
5.Charismatic Power .085 .635** -.577** .823** 1
6.Trait anxiety .169** -.228** .497** -.338** -.417** 1
7.Alienation from Work .069 -.264** .576** -.503** -.513** .647** 1
n:400; p<.01
Table 4. The mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between legitimate power and work alienation
Table 4. The mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between legitimate power and work alienation
Dependent Independent B sh t p %95Lower %95 Upper r2
Trait Anxiety .169 .034 3.41 .000 .049 .182 .028
Legal Power
Alienation .069 .059 1.33 .169 -.035 .196 .005
Legal Power -.041 .046 -1.07 .285 -.138 .041
Alienation .420
Trait Anxiety .674 .067 16.87 .000 .992 .254
Total Effect .081 .059 1.37 .169 -.035 .196
Direct Effect -.049 .046 -1.07 .285 -.138 -.041
Indirect Effect .110 .037 - - -.035 .183
Table 5. The mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between coercive power and work alienation
Table 5. The mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between coercive power and work alienation
Dependent Independent B sh t p %95Lower %95 Upper r2
Trait Anxiety .497 .027 11.42 .000 .251 .356 .247
Coercive Power
Alienation .576 .043 14.01 .000 .519 .688 .331
Coercive Power .337 .043 8.28 .002 .270 .438
Alienation .504
Trait Anxiety .480 .070 11.77 .000 .686 .961
Total Effect .604 .043 14.01 .000 .519 .688
Direct Effect .354 .043 8.28 .002 .270 .438
Indirect Effect .238 .028 - - .184 .294
Table 6. The mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between reward power and work alienation.
Table 6. The mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between reward power and work alienation.
Dependent Independent B sh t p %95Lower %95 Upper r2
Trait Anxiety -.228 .034 -4.66 .000 -.227 -.092 .052
Reward Power
Alienation -,264 .058 -5.46 .000 -.432 -.203 .070
Reward Power -.123 .047 -3.17 .002 -.240 -.056
Alienation .433
Trait Anxiety .619 .067 19.95 .000 .932 1.194
Total Effect -.318 .058 -5.46 .000 -.432 -.203
Direct Effect -.148 .047 -3.17 .002 -.240 -.056
Indirect Effect -.141 .032 - - -.206 -.077
Table 7. The mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between expert power and work alienation.
Table 7. The mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between expert power and work alienation.
Dependent Independent B sh t p %95Lower %95 Upper r2
Trait Anxiety -.338 .030 -7.16 .000 -.272 -.155 .114
Expert Power
Alienation -.503 .047 -11.59 .000 -.636 -.452 .253
Expert Power -.320 .040 -8.58 .000 -.426 -.267
Alienation .510
Trait Anxiety .539 .064 14.43 .000 .799 1.051
Total Effect -.544 .047 -11.59 .000 -.636 -.452
Direct Effect -.347 .040 -8.58 .000 .426 -.267
Indirect Effect -.182 .030 - - -.241 -.123
Table 8. The mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between charismatic power and work alienation.
Table 8. The mediating role of trait anxiety in the relationship between charismatic power and work alienation.
Dependent Independent B sh t p %95Lower %95 Upper r2
Trait Anxiety -.417 .025 -9.14 .000 -.277 -.179 .114
Charismatic Power
Alienation -.513 .040 -11.92 .000 -.362 -.430 .253
Charismatic Power -.293 .037 -7.47 .000 -.350 -.204
Alienation .510
Trait Anxiety .524 .068 13.36 .000 .767 1.033
Total Effect -.482 .040 -11.92 .000 -.562 -.403
Direct Effect -.277 .037 -7.47 .000 -.350 -.204
Indirect Effect -.218 .030 - - -.277 -.159
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated