This article was downloaded by: [University of Hong Kong Libraries]

On: 13 November 2014, At: 10:59

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Criminal Justice Studies: A Critical

Journal of Crime, Law and Society
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gjup20

The relationship of organizational

citizenship behavior with job
satisfaction, turnover intent, life
satisfaction, and burnout among
correctional staff
Eric G. Lambert

Department of Criminal Justice, 3281 Faculty Administration

Building , Wayne State University , Detroit, MI, 48202, USA
Published online: 15 Nov 2010.

To cite this article: Eric G. Lambert (2010) The relationship of organizational citizenship behavior
with job satisfaction, turnover intent, life satisfaction, and burnout among correctional staff,
Criminal Justice Studies: A Critical Journal of Crime, Law and Society, 23:4, 361-380, DOI:
10.1080/1478601X.2010.516533
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2010.516533

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions

Criminal Justice Studies

Vol. 23, No. 4, December 2010, 361380

RESEARCH ARTICLE
The relationship of organizational citizenship behavior with job
satisfaction, turnover intent, life satisfaction, and burnout among
correctional staff
Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Eric G. Lambert*
Department of Criminal Justice, 3281 Faculty Administration Building, Wayne State
University, Detroit, MI 48202, USA
Criminal
10.1080/1478601X.2010.516533
GJUP_A_516533.sgm
1478-601X
Research
Taylor
402010
23
Dr.
dz9258@wayne.edu
00000December
EricLambert
&
and
Justice
Article
Francis
Francis
(print)/1478-6028
Studies
2010
(online)

There has been considerable growth in research on correctional staff. This

literature has shown that correctional staff affects the workplace and the
correctional workplace affects staff. While many areas of working in institutional
corrections have been explored, there are many other areas that still need to be
investigated. This study examined the relationship between organizational
citizenship behaviors and job satisfaction, turnover intent, life satisfaction, and job
burnout. Organizational citizenship behaviors are efforts by employees above and
beyond what is expected. Using survey data from 160 correctional staff from a
Midwestern prison, organizational citizenship behaviors had a significant positive
relationship with job satisfaction and life satisfaction, and a significant negative
relationship with turnover intent and the three areas of job burnout of emotional
exhaustion, depersonalization, and perceived ineffectiveness at work.
Keywords: correctional staff; organizational citizenship behaviors; job
satisfaction; life satisfaction; turnover intent; job burnout

Substantial amounts of money are spent to fund institutional corrections in the USA.
Almost 50 billion dollars are spent annually to house more than 2.3 million adult
offenders in correctional facilities (Riordan, 2008). The operation of correctional
institutions is labor intensive. The cost of staff accounts for over 70% of the costs of
operating a correctional facility (Camp & Lambert, 2005). Correctional staff are
responsible for a myriad of tasks and duties to ensure that a safe, humane, and
secure facility is maintained. Thus, it can be argued that staff are the heart and soul
of any correctional facility, and that they are an important force in the success or
failure of a correctional institution. Archambeault and Archambeault (1982)
contended that correctional workers represent the single most important resource
available to any correctional agency or institution in attempting to accomplish its
mission, goals, and objectives (p. XXII). Yet, working in corrections is a unique
and sometimes trying experience (Brough & Williams, 2007). Unlike most organizations, prisons are not involved in the processing or the production of inanimate
objects; nor do they provide services to willing customers. Correctional facilities
hold inmates who for the most part are not willing clients, and at times can be
hostile and violent. Few other organizations are charged with the central task of

*Email: dz9258@wayne.edu
ISSN 1478-601X print/ISSN 1478-6028 online
2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/1478601X.2010.516533
http://www.informaworld.com

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

362

E.G. Lambert

supervising and securing an unwilling and potentially violent population

(Armstrong & Griffin, 2004, p. 577).
Because of the unique demands of working in corrections and the fact that correctional staff are critical for the proper functioning of a correctional facility, there has
been considerable research in the past several decades on the forces that affect and
influence staff members.
A growing body of research has examined how the correctional environment
affects employees. There has been a wealth of research to date that has explored the
potential causes and effects of correctional job stress, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. While this research has been instrumental in better understanding
how workplace forces affect correctional staff, there are many other areas of the
correctional workplace that need to be examined. Organizational citizenship behavior
is one area that needs to be further explored. This study examined the relationship
between organizational citizenship behavior and job satisfaction, turnover intent, life
satisfaction, and job burnout.
Literature review
At most organizations, there is a wide range of employee engagement. Some employees are minimalists who put forth the bare minimum amount of effort needed and
other employees are go-getters who make efforts beyond what is expected (Turnipseed & Rassuli, 2005). Extra work efforts are referred to as organizational citizenship
behaviors. The concept of organizational citizenship developed from the idea of extrarole behavior proposed by Katz (1964). Bateman and Organ (1983) are generally
credited with introducing the concept of organizational citizenship behaviors. Organizational citizenship means that an employee is going the extra mile, which in the
long run benefits the organization. Organizational citizenship behaviors are behaviors
by the employee that are not required by the job and are prosocial for other employees
and the organization (Somech & Drach-Zahavy, 2004). It refers to extra efforts from
workers that are not directly or explicitly required by the job or always (officially)
rewarded by the organization (Organ, 1988). This does not mean that organizational
citizenship behaviors are not recognized or rewarded sometimes in an organization.
They are not required as part of the job, and as such, are not always recognized in the
evaluation of an employee (Organ, 1997). Additionally, if the extra work behaviors
are recognized, the the rewards are uncertain and the relationship is indirect (Bragger, Rodriguez-Srednicki, Kutcher, Indovino, & Rosner, 2005, p. 305). Thus, any
possible organizational awards for organizational behaviors are not guaranteed and, if
they do occur, they will do so at some unknown future date (Organ, 1997).
Organizational citizenship behaviors are discretionary acts by employees
(Kohan & Mazmanian, 2003). The two primary parts of organizational citizenship
behaviors are compliance and altruism (Organ & Ryan, 1995; Williams & Anderson,
1991). Compliance refers to an employee following the rules of an organization, using
work time efficiently, completing tasks and duties in a timely manner, and striving to
be productive (Van Dyne, Graham, & Dienesch, 1994). The opposite of compliance
for workers is to cut corners, to do the least amount of work possible, and not to notify
supervisors when they have finished the assigned work and need additional work
(Dalal, 2005; Van Dyne et al., 1994). Altruism refers to when employees volunteer to
do work and to help coworkers without being asked (Donavan, Brown, & Mowen,
2004; Van Dyne et al., 1994). Altruistic acts are outside of the formal job descriptions

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Criminal Justice Studies

363

of employees. They do it because they wish to help others and the organization
(Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000).
Organizational citizenship behaviors are a benefit to organizations and coworkers.
It helps organizations to be both effective and efficient (Kemery, Bedeian, & Zacur,
1996; Podsakoff et al., 2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors enhance the experiences of coworkers. According to Podsakoff and MacKenzie (1997), organizational
citizenship behaviors lubricate the social machinery of the organization (p. 135). It
can make the workplace a more pleasant place for coworkers; therefore, organizational citizenship behaviors not only enhance the organizational performance, but the
psychological and social context of work as well (Blakely, Andrews, & Moorman,
2005). While it is beneficial, there has been nevertheless little research on organizational citizenship behaviors among correctional staff.
Only two published studies on organizational citizenship behavior and correctional
staff could be located. In a study of correctional officers at a Kentucky prison,
Culliver, Sigler, and McNeely (1991) found that organizational commitment was positively associated with organizational citizenship behaviors (which they labeled as
prosocial behavior). They concluded that it is probable that these correctional officers
are motivated in their work behavior by what they perceive to be best for the organization (Culliver et al., 1991, p. 283). In addition, they observed no significant correlation between empathy and the value concern for others and organizational
citizenship behaviors. This would suggest that organizational citizenship behaviors
are influenced by workplace forces rather than being entirely the result of individual
forces, such as personality. In a study of Midwestern correctional staff, Lambert,
Hogan, and Griffin (2008) reported that organizational commitment had a significant
positive relationship with organizational citizenship, while job stress had a negative
association. Job involvement, on the other hand, had a non-significant association
with organizational commitment. Moreover, they argued that research focusing on
the correctional environment should continue to explore the relationship between
prosocial behaviors and other workenvironment variables (Lambert et al., 2008,
p. 65). This study was therefore undertaken to explore the relationship of organizational citizenship with correctional staff job satisfaction, turnover intent, life satisfaction, and job burnout.
Research focus
Job satisfaction
Somech and Drach-Zahavy (2004) argued organizational citizenship behaviors do not
operate in a vacuum but rather operate in the overall work environment. Thus, it is
likely that not only do aspects of the work environment, as found in past correctional
studies, affect engagement in organizational citizenship behaviors, but organizational
citizenship behaviors themselves can be related to workplace outcomes. The social
exchange theory holds that social interactions at work can influence the attitudes and
behaviors of employees (Dalal, 2005). One possible relationship is between organizational citizenship behaviors and job satisfaction. According to Muchinsky (1987), job
satisfaction is an emotional, affective response resulting from the extent a person
derives pleasure from his or her job (p. 396). Hopkins (1983) defined job satisfaction
as the fulfillment or gratification of certain needs that are associated with ones work
(p. 7). Job satisfaction, therefore, results from an assessment by an employee about
his/her job in terms of meeting wants, desires, and needs (Cranny, Smith, & Stone,

364

E.G. Lambert

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

1992). When a person engages in organizational citizenship, it will likely result in

him/her having a more positive feeling about the job (Williams & Anderson, 1991).
Being compliant can result in feelings of accomplishment and being effective at work.
In addition, being altruistic, particularly by helping coworkers, can lead to increased
feelings of goodwill from coworkers. In the end, this can lead to feelings of being
valued and respected by coworkers. Most correctional staff want positive interactions
with coworkers (Paoline, Lambert, & Hogan, 2006). Organizational citizenship
behaviors may, therefore, meet the intrinsic and extrinsic needs of correctional staff.
Thus, organizational citizenship behaviors were hypothesized to be positively related
to job satisfaction for correctional staff.
Turnover intent
In a related fashion with the social exchange theory, organizational citizenship behaviors probably signal a desire to remain as an active member of the organization. People
who put forth extra efforts at work probably have a positive view of the organization
and plan to stay. Workers who do not engage in organizational citizenship behaviors
probably have a low view of the organization and do not have a strong desire to remain
over the long run. There is, therefore, a type of reciprocity between the worker and the
employing organization exhibited by organizational citizenship behaviors and a desire
to remain with the organization. As such, organizational citizenship behaviors should
have an inverse association with turnover intent. There are two types of turnover,
involuntary and voluntary (Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982; Price & Mueller, 1986).
Involuntary turnover is when an employee is fired by the organization. Usually involuntary turnover is less controllable, and in many cases, it is not in the best interest of
the organization (or the employee) that employment continues (McShane & Williams,
1993; Mitchell, MacKenzie, Styve, & Gover, 2000; Mowday et al., 1982; Stohr, Self,
& Lovrich, 1992). Voluntary turnover (i.e. quitting) is when the worker elects to leave
the job. Voluntary turnover tends to be more harmful to organizations because of the
direct and indirect costs and is often unexpected. In addition, voluntary turnover is a
much more likely type of turnover than is involuntary turnover in many correctional
facilities. Blakely and Bumphus (2004) reported the majority (6070%) of correctional staff turnover is voluntary. Moreover, Wright (1993) reported, in his study of
correctional staff, the best employees quit because they had more job opportunities.
Before actual voluntary turnover occurs, turnover intent is formed (Sager, Griffeth, &
Hom, 1998). Turnover intent is the cognitive process of thinking of quitting, planning
on leaving a job, and the desire to leave the job (Mobley, Griffeth, Hand, & Meglino,
1979). Correctional staff who engage in organizational citizenship behaviors have a
low intent to leave employment with the correctional agency. Conversely, staff
members who are low in organizational citizenship behaviors probably have a high
level of turnover intent. In a sense, organizational citizenship behaviors are the physical manifestation of the cognitive desires to remain with the correctional organization.
Life satisfaction
Life satisfaction is a cognitive appraisal of the overall degree of satisfaction a person
has with his/her life (Hart, 1999; Quinn & Staines, 1979). Life satisfaction is basically a persons general assessment with the overall quality of his/her life. Thus, life

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Criminal Justice Studies

365

satisfaction is generally viewed as a global assessment by an individual rather than to

focus on specific aspects of life, such as health, relationships, and so forth (Lambert,
Hogan, Paoline, & Baker, 2005). It is basically the degree a person is happy and satisfied with his or her overall life. Life satisfaction is important for both employees and
employers. Donovan and Halpern (2002) argued that when people are happier, they
tend to be more open-minded and creative in their thinking. In contrast, people who
are unhappy, stressed or dissatisfied tend to exhibit tunnel vision and rigid thinking (p. 32). Furthermore, people who are satisfied with their lives tend to be healthier
(Donovan & Halpern, 2002). Correctional institutions require well-balanced and
satisfied employees in order to be effective (Lambert et al., 2005). The spillover
theory holds that work occupies a major part of the lives of adults and what happens
at work affects peoples overall quality of life (Demerouti, Bakkar, & Schaufeli,
2005; Kantak, Futrell, & Sager, 1992; Steiner & Truxillo, 1989). In other words,
when the person feels positive at work, these positive feelings spillover and improve
the overall satisfaction with life for the person. When work is negative, people will be
less happy and satisfied with their lives. The spillover theory therefore postulates that
workplace factors influence the overall quality of life for most employees (Demerouti
et al., 2005; Kantak et al., 1992). As previously indicated, participation in organizational citizenship behaviors can lead to positive responses from coworkers and supervisors, which in the end can lead to the person feeling good about himself/herself.
The positive interactions and feelings at work are likely to spillover to other domains
of the persons life, and in the end, life satisfaction should rise; therefore, among
correctional staff organizational citizenship behaviors should be positively related to
life satisfaction.
Job burnout
Maslach and Jackson (1981), pioneers in the study of job burnout, defined burnout as
a syndrome of emotional exhaustion and cynicism that occurs frequently among individuals who do people work (p. 99). Job burnout is a real possibility in institutional
corrections where staff deal with inmates who can sometimes be demanding, unwilling,
and even violent (Keinan & Malach-Pines, 2007; Whitehead, 1989). This can take a
toll on a staff member. In the end, the staff member can suffer from job burnout. Job
burnout is a syndrome where the worker experiences emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a reduced sense of personal accomplishment (Maslach, 1982; Maslach &
Jackson, 1981); therefore, job burnout is a multidimensional concept, comprising the
areas of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a feeling of being ineffective
(Maslach & Jackson, 1981). Emotional exhaustion is the feeling of being emotionally
drained, fatigued, overextended, and used up from the job. Depersonalization refers to
treating others impersonally, callously, and as objects. Ineffectiveness is the perception
of being ineffective in dealing with others at work, including a feeling of not making
a positive impact on others and a feeling of not being competent and successful at work
(Maslach & Jackson, 1981, 1984; Schaufeli & Peeters, 2000; Whitehead, 1989). Based
on the personenvironment fit theory, workplace forces can either increase or decrease
the chances of burnout occurring (Lee & Ashford, 1996; Leiter, 1993). Maslach (2003)
argued that chronic strain that results from an incongruence, or misfit, between the
worker and the job (p. 189). Engaging in organizational citizenship behaviors suggests
that the person feels comfortable in the organization and is willing to extend efforts
on its behalf. These extra efforts may help shield the staff member from the workplace

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

366

E.G. Lambert

forces that can lead to strain for the worker, and ultimately burnout. Conversely, those
who do not engage in organizational citizenship behaviors may feel that they do not
belong and do not wish to belong. This can lead to strain and conflict for the person,
which in the long run can result in burnout from the job. Additionally, as previously
indicated, organizational citizenship may invoke positive responses from supervisors
and coworkers. Social support from coworkers, supervisors, and the administration can
help shield a person from burnout (Lee & Ashford, 1996; Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter,
2001). Past correctional studies have reported that a lack of supervisory support, a lack
of administrative support, and a lack of support from coworkers have all been observed
to lead to higher levels of burnout among correctional staff (Drory & Shamir, 1988;
Garland, 2004; Neveu, 2007; Savicki, Cooley, & Gjesvold, 2003). Therefore, organizational citizenship behaviors should be inversely linked with the three areas of job
burnout among correctional staff.
Hypotheses
To reiterate, the following hypotheses were made:
Hypothesis 1: Organizational citizenship behaviors will have a positive relationship with
correctional staff job satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2: Organizational citizenship behaviors will have a negative relationship with
correctional staff turnover intent.
Hypothesis 3: Organizational citizenship behaviors will have a positive relationship with
correctional staff life satisfaction.
Hypothesis 4: Organizational citizenship behaviors will have a negative relationship with
the emotional exhaustion area of job burnout among correctional staff.
Hypothesis 5: Organizational citizenship behaviors will have a negative relationship with
the depersonalization area of job burnout among correctional staff.
Hypothesis 6: Organizational citizenship behaviors will have a negative relationship with
the perception of being ineffective at work area of job burnout among correctional staff.

Methodology
Respondents
All the available staff at a Midwestern correctional facility (N = 200) were provided
with the survey. Some of the staff were not available at the time of the survey because
of various forms of leave, such as sick leave, disability leave, and vacation leave. A
cover letter explained the surveys purpose and informed the respondents that participation was both voluntary and all responses would remain anonymous. To encourage
employee participation, a raffle of several cash awards ranging from $25 to $100 was
held. All staff members were provided a bifurcated raffle ticket and were informed that
they would be entered into a raffle if they returned half of the raffle ticket. The returned
raffle tickets were separated from the surveys, so there was no possibility of linking a
respondent to a particular survey. Staff with winning raffle tickets were awarded cash
prizes, and all unclaimed prizes were donated to the employee organization at the
facility. One hundred and sixty (160) usable surveys were returned, for a response rate

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Criminal Justice Studies

367

of 80%. Due to the high rate of initial return, there was no follow-up survey. At the
time of the survey, the facility was a maximum security correctional facility that housed
460 individuals aged 1419 who were adjudicated as adults.
Those who responded represented a wide array of positions at the facility. Specifically, 62% of the respondents were correctional officers, 9% were custody supervisors, 6% worked in the business office, 4% worked in education, 3% were unit
management staff (i.e. counselors, case managers, and unit managers), 3% worked in
the medical department, and 13% worked in other areas. About 21% were supervisors
of other staff and 79% were not. Fifty-nine percent of the respondents were men and
41% were women. The median age of the respondents was 33 years old. The median
tenure at the correctional facility was 17 months, and ranged from 1 to 53 months. In
terms of educational experience, 6% of the respondents had a high school degree or
GED, 47% had some college but no degree, 24% had an associates degree, 16% had
a bachelors degree, and 7% had a graduate or professional degree. In regards to race/
ethnicity, 79% of the respondents were White, 11% were Black, 2% were Hispanic,
3% were Native American, and 4% were other. Overall, the respondents appeared to
be demographically similar to the overall staff at the correctional facility; at the time
of the survey, the characteristics of the overall correctional staff were 61% male, 81%
white, the average age was 3234, the average tenure was about 20 months, and about
two-thirds of the employees held a custody position. No educational information for
the overall employee population was available.
Variables
Organizational citizenship behavior
Organizational citizenship behavior was measured using eight items (see Appendix 1
for these eight indicators). These items have been used in non-criminal justice studies
(e.g. Bachrach & Jex, 2000; Konovsky & Organ, 1996; Podsakoff, MacKenzie,
Mooreman, & Fetter, 1990; Smith, Organ, & Near, 1983; Williams & Anderson,
1991). Most measures of organizational citizenship include the areas of altruism and
compliance (Organ & Ryan, 1995). The composite measure of organizational citizenship behavior includes both these areas. The items had a Cronbachs alpha value of
0.80 and were summed together to form an index.
Job satisfaction
A global rather than a facet-oriented measure of job satisfaction was used. Facet-based
measures ask workers about their satisfaction with specific areas of their jobs, such as
pay, tasks, coworkers, and so forth (Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969). Global measures
ask workers to what degree they like their job in general without asking about specific
facets of the job (Cranny et al., 1992). A global measure of job satisfaction was used
because it allows respondents to assess mentally what they feel are relevant dimensions in formulating a response to the issue of job satisfaction rather than restricting
them to think about specific facets of the job (Camp, 1994, p. 286). In addition, global
measures are the most common form of job satisfaction used in the correctional staff
literature (Lambert, Hogan, & Barton, 2002). Job satisfaction was measured using five
items (see Appendix 1) from Brayfield and Rothe (1951). The responses to the items
were summed together to form a job satisfaction index, and this index had a
Cronbachs alpha of 0.92.

368

E.G. Lambert

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Turnover intent
There are four cognitive parts of turnover intent: (1) thinking of quitting; (2) planning
to stay or leave; (3) searching for alternative employment; and (4) a desire to leave
current job (Mobley et al., 1979). Each of these areas was measured using items from
Sager et al. (1998) (see Appendix 1 for the items). The five items, which had a Cronbachs alpha value of 0.77, were summed together to form the turnover intent index.
Life satisfaction
Life satisfaction was measured using the two life satisfaction items from Quinn and
Staines (1979). These two items have been used in numerous life satisfaction studies
(Lambert et al., 2005). The two items ask respondents to assess their overall level of
satisfaction with their lives (see Appendix 1 for the items). The items were summed
together to form an index measuring life satisfaction, which had a Cronbachs alpha
value of 0.84.
Job burnout
The three burnout areas of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and perceived
ineffectiveness in dealing with others at work were measured. The burnout items are
from Griffin, Hogan, Lambert, Tucker-Gail, and Baker (2009). Three items were
summed to form an index for emotional exhaustion (see Appendix 1), which had a
Cronbachs alpha of 0.85. Depersonalization was created by summing together four
items, which had a Cronbachs alpha value of 0.74 (see Appendix 1). Perceptions of
ineffectiveness were measured by summing six items (see Appendix 1), which had a
Cronbachs alpha value of 0.72.
Control variables
The demographic characteristics of position, supervisory status, gender, age, tenure,
educational level, and race were included in the study as control variables. The variable for position measured if the respondent worked in a custody position (coded 1)
or a non-custody position (coded 0), and was labeled as correctional officer. The variable supervisor measured if the respondent was a supervisor of other correctional staff
(coded 1) or not (coded 0). A variable measuring gender was labeled as male and was
coded as 1 for men and 0 for women. Age was measured in continuous years. Tenure
at the correctional facility was measured in continuous months, and was labeled as
tenure. Educational level was measured as a variable representing whether a respondent had earned a college degree (coded 1) or not (coded 0), and was labeled in the
study as college degree. Finally, race/ethnicity was measured using a variable representing if the respondent was nonwhite or Hispanic (coded 0) or white/non-Hispanic
(coded 1) and was labeled as white.
Findings
Descriptive statistics for the variables are presented in Table 1. All variables had variation (i.e. were not constants). In addition, the variables were normally distributed.
Factor analysis was conducted for each of the indexes. The results indicated that the
items loaded on the predicted factors, including the burnout items, indicating convergent validity.

Holds the position of correctional officer (0 = no, 38%) (1 = yes, 62%)

Is a supervisor of other staff (0 = no, 79%) (1 = yes, 21%)
The gender of the respondent (0 = female, 41%) (1 = male, 59%)
Age in years
Length of employment at the prison in months
Has a college degree (0 = no, 53%) (1 = yes, 47%)
Race of respondent (0 = nonwhite, 21%) (1 = white, 79%)
An index measured by 8 items, = 0.80
An index measured by 5 items, = 0.92
An index measured by 5 items, = 0.77
An index measured by 2 items, = 0.84
An index measured by 3 items, = 0.85
An index measured by 4 items, = 0.74
An index measured by 6 items, = 0.72

Correctional Officer
Supervisor
Male
Age
Tenure
College Degree
White
Organizational Citizenship Behavior
Job Satisfaction
Turnover Intent
Life Satisfaction
Emotional Exhaustion
Depersonalization
Ineffectiveness

0
0
0
19
1
0
0
12
5
3
2
3
4
7

1
1
1
68
53
1
1
40
25
17
3
14
19
23

1
0
1
33
17
0
1
31
19
7
4
6
9
13

Min Max Median

0.62
0.21
0.59
35.77
20.64
0.47
0.79
31.00
18.34
8.02
4.30
6.00
9.42
13.20

Mean

0.49
0.41
0.49
10.82
13.84
0.50
0.40
4.69
4.67
3.76
1.13
2.40
2.93
3.10

SD

Note: Min stands for minimum value, Max stands for maximum value, SD stands for standard deviation, and stands for Cronbachs alpha for internal reliability. The
number of respondents was 160 (N = 160).

Description

Descriptive statistics.

Variable

Table 1.

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Criminal Justice Studies

369

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

370

E.G. Lambert

The correlations between the variables are presented in Table 2. Among the demographic characteristics, correctional officer, supervisor, and age had statistically
significant correlations with organizational citizenship behavior. Correctional officers
in general reported fewer contributions of organizational citizenship behaviors than
did non-correctional officer staff. Supervisors reported a higher level of organizational
citizenship behavior than did non-supervisory staff. As age increased, so did organizational citizenship behavior. The other demographic characteristics (i.e. male, tenure,
college degree, and white) all had non-significant correlations with organizational
citizenship behavior. Job satisfaction, turnover intent, life satisfaction, emotional
exhaustion, depersonalization, and ineffectiveness all had statistically significant
correlations with organizational citizenship behavior. Job satisfaction and life satisfaction both had positive correlations, while turnover intent, emotional exhaustion,
depersonalization, and ineffectiveness had negative correlations.
Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression equations were estimated with job
satisfaction, turnover intent, and life satisfaction as the dependent variables and the
control variables and organizational citizenship behavior as the independent variables. The results are reported in Table 3. Based on the correlations, the Variation
Inflation Factor (VIF) scores (not reported), and the tolerance values (not reported),
neither collinearity nor multicollinearity were problems. For the job satisfaction
equation, tenure and organizational citizenship had statistically significant associations with job satisfaction. Tenure had a negative association, which meant that
increases in tenure were associated with decreases in satisfaction from the job. Organizational citizenship behavior had a positive association with job satisfaction.
Increases in organizational citizenship behavior were associated with increased satisfaction from the job. The R-squared for the regression equation was 0.36, which
means that the independent variables accounted for 36% of the variance of the
dependent variable of job satisfaction.
For the turnover intent equation, the independent variables accounted for 20% of
the variance in the turnover intent index. Among the control variables, only age had
a significant association. As age increased, the turnover intent index dropped. Organizational citizenship behavior had a significant negative relationship with turnover
intent. In other words, involvement in organizational citizenship behaviors were
associated with decreased intentions to leave employment with the correctional
organization.
The independent variables accounted for 21% of the variance in the life satisfaction index. Tenure was the only demographic characteristic to have a significant association with life satisfaction. As tenure increased, the degree of satisfaction with life
decreased. Organizational citizenship behavior had a positive relationship with life
satisfaction.
OLS regression equations were estimated with the three dimensions of job burnout
as the dependent variables and the control variables and organizational citizenship
behavior as the independent variables. The results are reported in Table 4. Among the
control variables, supervisor and tenure had a positive association with the burnout
dimension of emotional exhaustion. Non-supervisors generally reported higher levels
of emotional exhaustion than supervisors. As tenure increased at the correctional
facility, emotional exhaustion also rose. Organizational citizenship behavior had a
significant negative association with emotional exhaustion. Overall, the independent
variables in the equation explained about 26% of the observed variance in the
emotional exhaustion measure.

1.00
0.12
0.16**
0.39**
0.19*
0.04
0.20*
0.28**
0.21**
0.09
0.16*
0.10
0.24**

2.

1.00
0.17*
0.01
0.13
0.08
0.08
0.07
0.02
0.08
0.05
0.08
0.12

3.

1.00
0.07
0.16*
0.05
0.18*
0.18*
0.26**
0.04
0.06
0.32**
0.08

4.

1.00
0.12
0.06
0.01
0.07
0.01
0.14
0.16
0.10
0.02

5.

1.00
0.08
0.13
0.15
0.01
0.10
0.01
0.04
0.10

6.

1.00
0.07
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.01

7.

1.00
0.53**
0.35**
0.41**
0.49**
0.54**
0.50**

8.

1.00
0.68**
0.52**
0.61**
0.44**
0.43**

9.

1.00
0.39**
0.51**
0.48**
0.24**

10.

1.00
0.57**
0.36**
0.31**

11.

1.00
0.46**
0.38**

12.

1.00
0.44**

13.

Note: See Table 1 for the coding of the variables. CO stands for correctional officer, College stands for college degree, OCB stands for organizational citizenship behavior,
Job Sat stands for job satisfaction, Life Sat stands for life satisfaction, Emotional stands for the emotional exhaustion dimension of job burnout, Deperson stands for the
depersonalization dimension of job burnout, and Ineffective stands for the perceived ineffectiveness dimension of job burnout. N = 160.
*p 0.05; **p 0.01.

1.00
0.47**
0.28**
0.53**
0.20**
0.29**
0.02
0.29**
0.30**
0.21**
0.13
0.09
0.32**
0.18**

1.

Correlation matrix.

1. CO
2. Supervisor
3. Male
4. Age
5. Tenure
6. College
7. White
8. OCB
9. Job Sat
10. Turnover Intent
11. Life Sat
12. Emotional
13. Deperson
14. Ineffective

Variables

Table 2.

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Criminal Justice Studies

371

372

E.G. Lambert

Table 3. Multivariate regression results on the relationship between organizational citizenship

behavior and job satisfaction, turnover intent, and life satisfaction.
Job satisfaction

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Variables
Correctional Officer
Supervisor
Male
Age
Tenure
College Degree
White
OCB
R-squared

Turnover intent

Life satisfaction

1.26
1.79
1.28
0.01
0.06
0.19
0.34
0.46

0.13
0.16
0.14
0.03
0.17*
0.05
0.03
0.46**
0.36**

0.10
1.40
0.31
0.07
0.01
0.77
0.40
0.25

0.03
0.15
0.04
0.21**
0.05
0.10
0.04
0.31**
0.20**

0.02
0.23
0.15
0.01
0.02
0.12
0.12
0.10

0.01
0.08
0.06
0.05
0.18*
0.06
0.04
0.39**
0.21**

Note: See Table 1 for the coding of the variables. OLS regression equations were estimated with job
satisfaction, turnover intent, and life satisfaction as the dependent variables and the control variables and
organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) as the independent variables. B represents the unstandardized
regression coefficient, represents the standard regression coefficient. N = 160.
*p 0.05; **p 0.01.

The R-squared value for the depersonalization equation was 0.38. Among the
demographic variables, only age had a significant effect. Increases in age were associated with decreases in treating others at work in an impersonal and callous manner.
The organizational citizenship behavior index had a significant negative relationship
with the emotional exhaustion burnout variable. Thus, increases in organizational citizenship behaviors were associated with decreases in reported emotional exhaustion
from work.
Table 4. Multivariate regression results on the relationship between organizational citizenship
behavior and job burnout dimensions of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and
perceived ineffectiveness.
Emotional exhaustion
Variables
Correctional Officer
Supervisor
Male
Age
Tenure
College Degree
White
OCB
R-squared

Depersonalization

Ineffectiveness

0.33
1.09
0.17
0.01
0.04
0.26
0.39
0.22

0.07
0.19*
0.04
0.02
0.22**
0.06
0.07
0.44**
0.26**

0.90
0.30
0.14
0.05
0.02
0.48
0.61
0.31

0.15
0.04
0.02
0.18*
0.12
0.08
0.08
0.50**
0.38**

0.21
0.93
0.93
0.01
0.01
0.20
0.12
0.32

0.03
0.12
0.15*
0.02
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.48**
0.29**

Note: See Table 1 for the coding of the variables. Ordinary Least Squares regression was used. B represents
the unstandardized regression coefficient, represents the standard regression coefficient, and OCB stands
for organizational citizenship behavior. N = 160.
*p 0.05; **p 0.01.

Criminal Justice Studies

373

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

The only control variable to have a significant association with the perception of
being ineffective at work was male. Female staff members were more likely to feel
that they were ineffective at work as compared to their male counterparts. The variable
for organizational citizenship behavior had a significant negative effect on the ineffectiveness measure. The independent variables in the equation accounted for about 29%
of the variance in the ineffectiveness index. Across all six OLS regression equations,
organizational citizenship behavior had the largest magnitude of effect based on the
standardized regression coefficient (i.e. the column in Tables 3 and 4).
Discussion and conclusion
This study explored the relationship between organizational citizenship behaviors and
job satisfaction, turnover intent, life satisfaction, emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and perceptions of being ineffective among correctional staff. All six hypotheses
were supported by the findings. Organizational citizenship behaviors were positively
associated with job satisfaction. It appears that correctional staff who engage in organizational citizenship behaviors also report being more satisfied from their jobs. It
could be that organizational citizenship behaviors lead to positive outcomes at work
for the employee, such as improved relations with supervisors and coworkers, and
meeting these needs allows staff to look more favorably towards their jobs. Likewise,
organizational citizenship behaviors appear to be positively related to overall satisfaction with life. Engaging in organizational citizenship behaviors may allow correctional employees to feel good about themselves and work, and this spills over to
enhance their overall quality of life. Organizational citizenship appears to add positive
effects to correctional staff, at least in terms of job satisfaction and life satisfaction.
Furthermore, organizational citizenship behaviors appear to be linked with
providing a buffer against negative work outcomes. They are inversely linked with
both turnover intent and the three burnout areas. Because organizational citizenship
behaviors lead to investments within the organization, these investments probably
increase the chances that a person will wish to remain part of the organization. In
addition, because organizational citizenship behaviors may result in positive
outcomes and feelings for the correctional staff member, it probably reduces his/her
desire to leave employment at the correctional facility. Similarly, organizational
citizenship may help insulate the forces that lead to burnout for correctional staff.
Support from coworkers, supervisors, and administrators because of feelings of gratitude and goodwill of being helped by the person may provide the staff member with
support mechanisms that allow them to either avoid or deal with the factors linked
with job burnout. Regardless of the explanations, the results suggest that organizational citizenship is positively linked with beneficial outcomes and negatively associated with detrimental outcomes.
Job satisfaction is generally viewed as a positive outcome for both the employee
and the employing organization. It has been linked with job performance, as well as
a more pleasant working experience for the employee and his/her coworkers
(Clegg & Dunkerley, 1980; Paoline et al., 2006). Life satisfaction is an important
outcome. Employees who are happy with their lives tend to be more open-minded,
able to interact with others effectively, creative, and healthier (Lambert et al., 2005).
Voluntary turnover is costly to correctional institutions. There are both direct and
indirect costs of replacing staff who leave an institution (Lambert & Hogan, 2009).
According to Maslach (1978), burnout occurs when workers experience the gradual

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

374

E.G. Lambert

loss of caring about the people they work with. Over time, they find that they
simply cannot sustain the kind of personal care and commitment required in
the encounters that are the essence of their job (p. 56). Thus, burnout is costly to
the individual staff member, inmates, coworkers, family members and friends, the
correctional organization, and society (Carlson & Thomas, 2006; Garland, 2004;
Garner, Knight, & Simpson, 2007). Thus, there is a need for correctional administrators to be concerned about each of these outcomes. This study indicates that organizational citizenship behaviors may be linked with each of these areas. Moreover,
organizational citizenship behaviors are a positive outcome in their own right for
correctional organizations, especially in light of their heavy dependence on staff for
daily operations. Thus, correctional administrators should focus on increasing the
organizational citizenship behaviors among their staff. It would be a positive
outcome for all involved. This means that the forces that lead to organizational citizenship behaviors in correctional facilities need to be identified and understood.
There is thus a need for future research on the variables that cause organizational
citizenship among correctional staff. To date, there have been only two published
studies of organizational citizenship behaviors among correctional staff. There needs
to be far greater research focus on organizational citizenship behaviors. As Turnipseed and Rassuli (2005) pointed out, given that organizational citizenship behaviors
are positive for organizations, managers should attempt to increase their frequency
and intensity (p. 232).
As with many studies, the current study had limitations. The data was from staff
at a single correctional facility. Studies are needed of staff at other correctional facilities to determine whether the results can be replicated. In addition, future research is
needed to explore whether organizational citizenship behaviors and its relationships
with other work environment variables vary by type of facility (e.g. adult, juvenile,
jail, etc.) and by region. In addition, longitudinal research is needed to determine the
causal process. In this study, a cross-sectional survey was undertaken. This means that
the causal direction of organizational citizenship behaviors with job satisfaction, turnover intent, life satisfaction, and the areas of job burnout are not known. This is why
the terms association and relationship were used rather than effects or causal relationships. It is likely that the relationship with organizational citizenship behaviors and the
outcome variables in this study are more complex than presented. In the current study,
the relationship was treated as non-recursive (i.e. one way from organizational citizenship to job satisfaction, turnover intent, life satisfaction, and the areas of job burnout).
It is possible that over time, the causal relationship is recursive (i.e. the effects go in
both directions). For example, organizational citizenship behaviors may increase job
satisfaction, but an increase in job satisfaction later results in increased engagement in
organizational citizenship behaviors. It is also possible that job satisfaction first
positively influences organizational citizenship behaviors, and later organizational
citizenship behaviors have a positive effect on job satisfaction. Future research is
needed to untangle the causal directions of the relationships observed in the current
study. As previously indicated, additional research is needed to explore the antecedents of correctional staff organizational citizenship behaviors. Additionally, future
studies need to explore the relationship between organizational citizenship behaviors
and other outcome areas, such relations with coworkers, workfamily conflict, quality
of interactions with inmates, and so forth. Future research may wish to explore the
development and testing of more refined measures than those used in the current
study. Only with this additional research will a more complete understanding of

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Criminal Justice Studies

375

organizational citizenship behaviors and how it operates in correctional institutions be

gained. Without knowledge generated by future research, both administrators and
scholars will be hampered in developing more positive work environments at correctional facilities.
In closing, institutional corrections is expensive, with personnel comprising the
largest expenditure. We live in an era of shrinking budgets and greater demand. With
the economic strain faced by many governments, using financial resources efficiently
should be a goal of correctional administrators. One method for being more effective
is to increase organizational citizenship behaviors among correctional staff. The
results of the current study found a positive relationship between organizational citizenship behaviors and job satisfaction and life satisfaction. Similarly, the results
showed a negative association between organizational citizenship and turnover intent
and the burnout areas of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and ineffectiveness.
Job satisfaction, life satisfaction, turnover intent, and job burnout are all critical areas
for correctional organizations. They are also important areas for correctional staff. In
the end, correctional staff are the driving force within a correctional institution. It is
important to explore the factors which have significant impacts on them, as well as the
correctional organization. This was but a single, exploratory study. Future research is
needed to provide a clearer understanding and reiterate the importance of organizational citizenship behaviors within correctional facilities. It is hoped that this current
study will spark interest in researching organizational citizenship behaviors in the
field of institutional corrections. Research can light the way for a brighter future.
Acknowledgements
Eric Lambert thanks Janet Lambert for editing and proofreading the paper. He also thanks the
editor and the anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions. These comments and
suggestions improved the paper.

Notes on contributor
Eric G. Lambert is a Professor of Criminal Justice at Wayne State University. He received his
PhD from the School of Criminal Justice at the State University of New York at Albany. His
research interests include organizational issues, job and organizational effects on the attitudes,
intentions, and behaviors of criminal justice employees, and the international perceptions,
attitudes, and views on criminal justice issues.

References
Archambeault, W., & Archambeault, B. (1982). Correctional supervisory management:
Principles of organization, policy, and law. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Armstrong, G., & Griffin, M. (2004). Does the job matter? Comparing correlates of stress
among treatment and correctional staff in prisons. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32,
577592.
Bachrach, D., & Jex, S. (2000). Organizational citizenship behavior and mood: An experimental test of perceived job breadth. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 641663.
Bateman, T., & Organ, D. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good solider: The relationship
between affect and employee citizenship. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 587595.
Blakely, C., & Bumphus, V. (2004). Private and public sector prisons A comparison of
select characteristics. Federal Probation, 68(1), 4955.
Blakely, G., Andrews, M., & Moorman, R. (2005). The moderating effects of equity sensitivity on the relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship
behaviors. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 259273.

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

376

E.G. Lambert

Bragger, J., Rodriguez-Srednicki, O., Kutcher, E., Indovino, L., & Rosner, E. (2005). Work
family conflict, workfamily culture, and organizational citizenship behavior among
teachers. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 303324.
Brayfield, A., & Rothe, H. (1951). An index of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 35, 307311.
Brough, P., & Williams, J. (2007). Managing occupational stress in a high-risk industry:
Measuring the job demands of correctional officers. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34,
555567.
Camp, S. (1994). Assessing the effects of organizational commitment and job satisfaction on
turnover: An event history approach. The Prison Journal, 74, 279305.
Camp, S., & Lambert, E. (2005). The influence of organizational incentives on absenteeism:
Sick leave use among correctional workers. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 17, 144172.
Carlson, J., & Thomas, G. (2006). Burnout among prison caseworkers and corrections officers. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 43(3), 1934.
Clegg, S., & Dunkerley, D. (1980). Organization, class, and control. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul.
Cranny, C., Smith, P., & Stone, E. (1992). Job satisfaction: How people feel about their jobs
and how it affects their performance. New York, NY: Lexington Books.
Culliver, C., Sigler, R., & McNeely, B. (1991). Examining prosocial organizational behavior
among correctional officers. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal
Justice, 15, 277284.
Dalal, R. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior
and counterproductive work behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 12411255.
Demerouti, E., Bakkar, A., & Schaufeli, W. (2005). Spillover and crossover of exhaustion and
life satisfaction among dual-earner parents. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 266289.
Donavan, D., Brown, T., & Mowen, J. (2004). Internal benefits of service-worker customer
orientation: Job satisfaction, commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviors.
Journal of Marketing, 68, 128146.
Donovan, N., & Halpern, D. (2002). Life satisfaction: The state of knowledge and
implications for government. London: Strategy Unit.
Drory, A., & Shamir, B. (1988). Effects of organizational and life variables on job satisfaction
and burnout. Group and Organization Studies, 13, 441455.
Garland, B. (2004). The impact of administrative support on prison treatment staff burnout:
An exploratory study. The Prison Journal, 84, 452471.
Garner, B., Knight, K., & Simpson, D. (2007). Burnout among corrections-based drug treatment staff: Impact of individual and organizational factors. International Journal of
Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 51, 510522.
Griffin, M., Hogan, N., Lambert, E., Tucker-Gail, K., & Baker, D. (2009). Job involvement,
job stress, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment and burnout of correctional
staff. Criminal Justice and Behavior [Online version]. Retrieved December 14, 2009,
from http://cjb.sagepub.com/cgi/rapidpdf/0093854809351682v1
Hart, P. (1999). Predicting employee life satisfaction: A coherent model of personality, work
and nonwork experiences, and domain satisfactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84,
564584.
Hopkins, A. (1983). Work and job satisfaction in the public sectors. Totowa, NJ: Rowman
and Allonheld.
Kantak, D., Futrell, C., & Sager, J. (1992). Job satisfaction and life satisfaction in a sales
force. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 12, 17.
Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral Science, 9,
131133.
Keinan, G., & Malach-Pines, A. (2007). Stress and burnout among prison personnel: Sources,
outcomes, and intervention strategies. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 380398.
Kemery, E., Bedeian, A., & Zacur, S. (1996). Expectancy-based job cognitions and job affect
as predictors of organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
26, 635651.
Kohan, A., & Mazmanian, D. (2003). Police work, burnout, and pro-organizational behavior:
A consideration of daily work experiences. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30, 559583.

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Criminal Justice Studies

377

Konovsky, M., & Organ, D. (1996). Dispositional and contextual determinants of organizational
citizenship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 253266.
Lambert, E., & Hogan, N. (2009). The importance of job satisfaction and organizational
commitment in shaping turnover intent: A test of a causal model. Criminal Justice
Review, 34, 96118.
Lambert, E., Hogan, N., & Barton, S. (2002). Satisfied correctional staff: A review of the
literature on the antecedents and consequences of correctional staff job satisfaction. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 115143.
Lambert, E., Hogan, N., & Griffin, M. (2008). Being the good soldier: Organizational citizenship behavior and commitment among correctional staff. Criminal Justice and Behavior,
35, 5668.
Lambert, E., Hogan, H., Paoline, E., & Baker, D. (2005). The good life: The impact of job
satisfaction and occupational stressors on correctional staff life satisfaction An exploratory study. Journal of Crime and Justice, 18, 126.
Lee, R., & Ashford, B. (1996). A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the three
dimensions of job burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 123133.
Leiter, M. (1993). Burnout as a development process: Consideration of models. In W.
Schaufeli, C. Maslach, & T. Marek (Eds.), Professional burnout: Recent developments in
theory and research (pp. 237250). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.
Maslach, C. (1978). Job burnout: How people cope. Public Welfare, 36, 5658.
Maslach, C. (1982). Burnout: The cost of caring. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Maslach, C. (2003). Job burnout: New directions in research and intervention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 189192.
Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of
Occupational Behavior, 2, 99113.
Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. (1984). Burnout in organizational settings. In S. Oskamp (Ed.),
Applied social psychology annual 5 (pp. 135153). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W., & Leiter, M. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Reviews of Psychology,
52, 397422.
McShane, M., & Williams, F. (1993). The management of correctional institutions. New
York, NY: Garland.
Mitchell, O., MacKenzie, D., Styve, G., & Gover, A. (2000). The impact of individual, organizational, and voluntary turnover among juvenile correctional staff members. Justice
Quarterly, 17, 333357.
Mobley, W., Griffeth, R., Hand, H., & Meglino, B. (1979). Review and conceptual analysis of
the employee turnover process. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 493522.
Mowday, R., Porter, L., & Steers, R. (1982). Employeeorganization linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Muchinsky, P. (1987). Psychology applied to work: An introduction to industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: Dorsey Press.
Neveu, J.-P. (2007). Jailed resources: Conservation of resources theory as applied to burnout
among prison guards. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 2142.
Organ, D. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good solider syndrome. Lexington,
MA: Lexington Books.
Organ, D. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its construct clean-up time. Human
Performance, 10, 8597.
Organ, D., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48, 775802.
Paoline, E., Lambert, E., & Hogan, N. (2006). A calm and happy keeper of the keys: The
impact of ACA views, relations with coworkers, and policy views on the job stress and
job satisfaction of jail staff. The Prison Journal, 8, 182205.
Podsakoff, P., & MacKenzie, S. (1997). Impact of organizational citizenship behavior on
organizational performance: A review and suggestions for future research. Human Performance, 10, 133151.
Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Mooreman, R., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader
behavior and their effects on followers trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational
citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1, 107142.

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

378

E.G. Lambert

Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Paine, J., & Bachrach, D. (2000). Organizational citizenship
behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for
future research. Journal of Management, 26, 513563.
Price, J., & Mueller, C. (1986). Absenteeism and turnover among hospital employees.
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Quinn, R., & Staines, G. (1979). The 1977 quality of employment survey. Ann Arbor, MI:
Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.
Riordan, J. (2008). More than one in 100 adults are behind bars, Pew study finds. The Pew
Charitable Trusts. Retrieved December 2, 2009, from http://www.pewtrusts.org/
news_room_detail.aspx?id=35890
Sager, J., Griffeth, R., & Hom, P. (1998). A comparison of structural models representing
turnover cognitions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 53, 254273.
Savicki, V., Cooley, E., & Gjesvold, J. (2003). Harassment as a predictor of job burnout in
corrections officers. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30, 602619.
Schaufeli, W., & Peeters, M. (2000). Job stress and burnout among correctional officers: A
literature review. International Journal of Stress Management, 7, 1948.
Smith, C., Organ, D., & Near, J. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and
antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653663.
Smith, P., Kendall, L., & Hulin, C. (1969). The measurement of satisfaction in work and
retirement. Chicago, IL: Rand-McNally.
Somech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2004). Exploring organizational citizenship behavior from
an organizational perspective: The relationship between organizational learning and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,
77, 281298.
Steiner, D., & Truxillo, D. (1989). An improved test of the disaggregation hypothesis of job
and life satisfaction. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 62, 3339.
Stohr, M., Self, R., & Lovrich, N. (1992). Staff turnover in new generation jails: An investigation of its causes and preventions. Journal of Criminal Justice, 20, 455478.
Turnipseed, D., & Rassuli, A. (2005). Performance perceptions of organizational citizenship
behaviors at work: A bi-level study among managers and employees. British Journal of
Management, 16, 231244.
Van Dyne, L., Graham, J., & Dienesch, R. (1994). Organizational citizenship behavior:
Construct redefinition, operationalization, and validation. Academy of Management
Journal, 37, 765802.
Whitehead, J. (1989). Burnout in probation and corrections. New York, NY: Praeger.
Williams, L., & Anderson, S. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as
predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17,
601617.
Wright, T. (1993). Correctional employee turnover: A longitudinal study. Journal of Criminal
Justice, 21, 131142.

Criminal Justice Studies

379

Appendix 1
Unless otherwise indicated, the following index items were answered with a 5-point Likert-type
of scale where 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = uncertain, 4 = agree, and 5 = strongly agree.

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Organizational citizenship behavior

(1) I frequently volunteer to do things without being asked.
(2) I often take time away from my job to help others with their work without asking for
a reward.
(3) Sometimes I will coast during part of the work day when there is little work to do
rather than trying to find new work (reverse coded).
(4) If possible, I take extra unauthorized breaks (reverse coded).
(5) I put forth a great deal of effort at work.
(6) I often try to help fellow employees so they will become more productive.
(7) When possible, I take longer lunches or breaks than allowed (reverse coded).
(8) I often help others at work who have a heavy workload without being asked to do so.

Job satisfaction
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)

I definitely dislike my job (reverse coded index).

I like my job better than the average worker does.
Most days I am enthusiastic about my job.
I find real enjoyment in my job.
I feel fairly well satisfied with my job.

Turnover intent
(1) In the last six months, have you thought about quitting your current job (response
options of Yes = 1 and No = 0).
(2) I frequently think about quitting my job at this prison.
(3) How likely is it that you will be at this job in a year from now (response options of 5point Likert of scale ranging from very likely (coded 1) to very unlikely (coded 5)).
(4) How actively have you searched for a job with other employers in the last year
(response options of 5-point Likert scale ranging from not at all (coded 1) to very
actively (coded 5)).
(5) Do you desire to voluntarily leave/quit your job? (response options of Yes = 1 and No = 0).

Life satisfaction
(1) Taking all things together, how happy would you say you are with your life (response
options of Not Too Happy = 1, Happy = 2, and Very Happy = 3).
(2) In general, how satisfying do you find the ways youre spending your life these days
(response options of Not Too Satisfying = 1, Satisfying = 2, and Very Satisfying = 3).

Emotional exhaustion burnout

(1) Working with others is an emotional strain for me.
(2) I feel that I am burned out from my job.
(3) I am emotionally drained at the end of the day from my job.

380

E.G. Lambert

Depersonalization burnout
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

I feel that I treat some inmates as if they were impersonal objects.

I feel that I have become more callous toward my coworkers.
I am becoming less sympathetic to others at work.
The vast majority of time at work, I treat all inmates and staff with respect (reverse
coded).

Downloaded by [University of Hong Kong Libraries] at 10:59 13 November 2014

Perceptions of ineffectiveness burnout

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)

I feel that my coworkers value my assistance (reverse coded).

I feel that I am effective in solving problems at work (reverse coded).
I feel that I am a positive influence at this prison (reverse coded).
I have the ability to deal effectively with the problems of inmates (reverse coded).
I feel that I am positively influencing inmates with my work here (reverse coded).
I feel that I can create a relaxed atmosphere with inmates (reverse coded).