Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Walkey, F. H.
Right arrow Articles by Green, D. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

An Exhaustive Examination of the Replicable Factor Structure of the Maslach Burnout Inventory

Frank H. Walkey

Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand

Dianne E. Green

Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand

Three-factor first order analyses have been used in the most successful of previous attempts to define the factor and subscale structures of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. It is suggested in the present paper that although a three factor structure has been shown to be the most readily replicable, this result does not exhaust the number of possible replicable factors in the Inventory. Using six independent sets of data drawn from previous studies involving a variety of subjects, the present analysis revealed the somewhat doubtful status of the general factor underlying the total score on the 22 items of the Inventory. In all six sets of data, the 22 items of the Inventory also divided between two clearly replicable factors, the larger of which was tentatively identified as the "Core of Burnout." Responses to the 14 items loading on this factor were subsequently found to divide in turn, into two equally replicable factors. These two factors, together with that differentiated from the "Core of Burnout," were exactly the same as those most frequently identified in previous three factor analyses of the Inventory.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 52, No. 2, 309-323 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164492052002006


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Research on Social Work PracticeHome page
H. Kim and Juye Ji
Factor Structure and Longitudinal Invariance of the Maslach Burnout Inventory
Research on Social Work Practice, May 1, 2009; 19(3): 325 - 339.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
J. A. Worley, M. Vassar, D. L. Wheeler, and L. L. B. Barnes
Factor Structure of Scores From the Maslach Burnout Inventory: A Review and Meta-Analysis of 45 Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor-Analytic Studies
Educational and Psychological Measurement, October 1, 2008; 68(5): 797 - 823.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
W. B. Schaufeli, J. Daamen, and H. Van Mierlo
Burnout among Dutch Teachers: An Mbi-Validity Study
Educational and Psychological Measurement, September 1, 1994; 54(3): 803 - 812.
[Abstract]


Home page
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
P. J. Holland, W. B. Michael, and S. Kim
Construct Validity of the Educators Survey for a Sample of Middle School Teachers
Educational and Psychological Measurement, September 1, 1994; 54(3): 822 - 829.
[Abstract]