1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.0 Overview Over ... - DSpace@UM

Then, condition 2 was to regress the independent variable (work stressor) towards thedependent variable (psychological health symptoms).The standardized regressioncoefficient ( Beta= -.544) associated with the effect of those independent variables onpsychological health symptoms were significant (p=0.000). The second condition is alsomet.Meanwhile, the condition 3, coping strategy was regressed on psychological healthsymptoms. Here, the coefficient associated with the relation between coping strategy andpsychological health symptom was not significant (Beta=.187, p = .119). This resultprompted for further analysis by each coping strategy. The results shown in Table 4.18indicates that the Flight/Fight focus and Emotions focus seems to be significant while theProblem focus is not significant. This differs from the professionals in Singapore asconcluded in a study in Singapore lawyers (Choo, 1983). The hierarchical regressionshowed the following results with significant relationship (Beta=.034; p=0.039). Theabove findings shows that the relationship between employment type and coping strategybecomes significant when work stressor plays only a partly mediating role.In summary, the results failed to accept null Hypothesis 1 to Hypothesis 3, thus inanother word, it indicates that statistically there is no significant difference onemployment type to psychological health symptoms, sources of work stressors onemployment type and the coping strategy adopted against employment type. On thecontrary, the output of the hierarchical multiple regressions suggests that work stressorsplayed a full mediating role between employment type and coping strategy while60