Person Dimension

Author

Community Insights Group

Published

March 30, 2026

Burnout

Burnout is a work‑related syndrome with three interrelated dimensions (for more details see Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2(2), 99–113):

  • Emotional Exhaustion: Feeling emotionally drained, depleted, and lack energy;
  • Cynicism: Distancing, irritability, or impersonal treatment of others; and
  • Professional Efficacy: Sense of competence, achievement, and effectiveness.

In our study burnout was measured using one item per dimension, respectively: “My work is breaking me down”, “I am more insensitive to people because of my work”, and “Through my work, I have a positive influence on people”.

Figure 1: Average burnout scores (±1 SD) across three dimensions (scale: 0 - Never, 1 - Some of the time, 2 - Most of the time, 3 - Always).
Table 1: Descriptive statistics for work burnout dimensions (scale: 0 - Never, 1 - Some of the time, 2 - Most of the time, 3 - Always).
Dimension N Mean SD Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Emotional Exhaustion 281 0.81 0.70 0 0 1 1 3
Cynicism 281 0.53 0.85 0 0 0 1 3
Professional Efficacy 281 2.05 0.68 0 2 2 3 3
Note: For Emotional Exhaustion and Cynicism, higher scores indicate greater vulnerability burnout. For Professional Efficacy, higher scores indicate greater protection against burnout.

Burnout by Gender

Figure 2: Burnout dimensions across Gender (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Burnout by Age

Figure 3: Burnout dimensions across age categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 2: Descriptive statistics for burnout dimensions by age category (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Age Category
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Age Category N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Emotional Exhaustion 35 or younger 30 0.82 0.72 0.14 0 0 1 1.00 2
Emotional Exhaustion 36–50 176 0.90 0.73 0.06 0 0 1 1.00 3
Emotional Exhaustion 51 or older 75 0.60 0.57 0.07 0 0 1 1.00 2
Cynicism 35 or younger 30 0.71 0.94 0.18 0 0 0 1.25 3
Cynicism 36–50 176 0.49 0.80 0.06 0 0 0 1.00 3
Cynicism 51 or older 75 0.56 0.93 0.11 0 0 0 1.00 3
Professional Efficacy 35 or younger 30 1.93 0.74 0.14 1 1 2 2.00 3
Professional Efficacy 36–50 176 2.05 0.69 0.05 0 2 2 3.00 3
Professional Efficacy 51 or older 75 2.09 0.66 0.08 1 2 2 3.00 3

Burnout by Years of Experience

Figure 4: Burnout dimensions across years of experience categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 3: Descriptive statistics for burnout dimensions by years of experience (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Years of Experience
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Years of Experience N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Emotional Exhaustion 5 or less 23 0.73 0.77 0.16 0 0 1 1.0 2
Emotional Exhaustion 6–10 52 0.71 0.62 0.09 0 0 1 1.0 2
Emotional Exhaustion 11–20 117 0.88 0.76 0.07 0 0 1 1.0 3
Emotional Exhaustion 21 or more 51 0.73 0.64 0.09 0 0 1 1.0 2
Cynicism 5 or less 23 0.64 0.95 0.20 0 0 0 1.0 3
Cynicism 6–10 52 0.63 0.89 0.13 0 0 0 1.0 3
Cynicism 11–20 117 0.60 0.93 0.09 0 0 0 1.0 3
Cynicism 21 or more 51 0.31 0.65 0.09 0 0 0 0.0 3
Professional Efficacy 5 or less 23 1.91 0.73 0.15 1 1 2 2.0 3
Professional Efficacy 6–10 52 2.10 0.66 0.09 1 2 2 3.0 3
Professional Efficacy 11–20 117 2.09 0.68 0.06 0 2 2 3.0 3
Professional Efficacy 21 or more 51 2.06 0.68 0.09 1 2 2 2.5 3

Burnout by Residence Region

Figure 5: Burnout dimensions across residence regions (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 4: Descriptive statistics for burnout dimensions by residence region (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Residence Region
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Residence Region N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Emotional Exhaustion Asia 12 0.50 0.52 0.15 0 0.00 0.5 1.00 1
Emotional Exhaustion Australia 36 1.03 0.62 0.10 0 1.00 1.0 1.00 3
Emotional Exhaustion Canada 10 0.80 0.63 0.20 0 0.25 1.0 1.00 2
Emotional Exhaustion Europe/UK 83 0.82 0.69 0.08 0 0.00 1.0 1.00 3
Emotional Exhaustion Latin America 41 0.49 0.56 0.09 0 0.00 0.0 1.00 2
Emotional Exhaustion Other 5 1.00 1.00 0.45 0 0.00 1.0 2.00 2
Emotional Exhaustion Sub-Saharan Africa 61 0.85 0.78 0.10 0 0.00 1.0 1.00 3
Emotional Exhaustion USA 15 0.67 0.49 0.13 0 0.00 1.0 1.00 1
Cynicism Asia 12 0.33 0.65 0.19 0 0.00 0.0 0.25 2
Cynicism Australia 36 0.31 0.75 0.12 0 0.00 0.0 0.00 3
Cynicism Canada 10 0.40 0.97 0.31 0 0.00 0.0 0.00 3
Cynicism Europe/UK 83 0.54 0.82 0.09 0 0.00 0.0 1.00 3
Cynicism Latin America 41 0.71 0.98 0.15 0 0.00 0.0 1.00 3
Cynicism Other 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0
Cynicism Sub-Saharan Africa 61 0.70 0.98 0.13 0 0.00 0.0 1.00 3
Cynicism USA 15 0.27 0.46 0.12 0 0.00 0.0 0.50 1
Professional Efficacy Asia 12 2.33 0.65 0.19 1 2.00 2.0 3.00 3
Professional Efficacy Australia 36 1.83 0.61 0.10 1 1.00 2.0 2.00 3
Professional Efficacy Canada 10 1.90 0.74 0.23 1 1.25 2.0 2.00 3
Professional Efficacy Europe/UK 83 1.88 0.59 0.07 1 2.00 2.0 2.00 3
Professional Efficacy Latin America 41 2.27 0.67 0.10 1 2.00 2.0 3.00 3
Professional Efficacy Other 5 1.80 0.45 0.20 1 2.00 2.0 2.00 2
Professional Efficacy Sub-Saharan Africa 61 2.34 0.73 0.09 0 2.00 2.0 3.00 3
Professional Efficacy USA 15 1.93 0.59 0.15 1 2.00 2.0 2.00 3

Burnout by Education Categories

Figure 6: Burnout dimensions across education categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 5: Descriptive statistics for burnout dimensions by education category (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Education Category
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Education Category N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Emotional Exhaustion Bachelor's 47 0.75 0.75 0.11 0 0 1 1 3
Emotional Exhaustion Master's 188 0.80 0.67 0.05 0 0 1 1 3
Emotional Exhaustion Doctoral 37 0.92 0.77 0.13 0 0 1 1 3
Cynicism Bachelor's 47 0.58 0.99 0.15 0 0 0 1 3
Cynicism Master's 188 0.51 0.82 0.06 0 0 0 1 3
Cynicism Doctoral 37 0.54 0.80 0.13 0 0 0 1 3
Professional Efficacy Bachelor's 47 2.06 0.57 0.08 1 2 2 2 3
Professional Efficacy Master's 188 2.05 0.70 0.05 0 2 2 3 3
Professional Efficacy Doctoral 37 2.03 0.73 0.12 1 2 2 3 3

Burnout by Employment Status

Figure 7: Burnout dimensions across employment status categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 6: Descriptive statistics for burnout dimensions by employment status (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Employment Status
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Employment Status N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Emotional Exhaustion Employed full-time 156 0.77 0.73 0.06 0 0 1 1.00 3
Emotional Exhaustion Employed part-time 18 0.83 0.79 0.19 0 0 1 1.00 3
Emotional Exhaustion Out of work and looking for work 12 1.08 0.29 0.08 1 1 1 1.00 2
Emotional Exhaustion Self-employed 47 0.77 0.60 0.09 0 0 1 1.00 2
Cynicism Employed full-time 156 0.61 0.90 0.07 0 0 0 1.00 3
Cynicism Employed part-time 18 0.39 0.78 0.18 0 0 0 0.00 2
Cynicism Out of work and looking for work 12 0.25 0.45 0.13 0 0 0 0.25 1
Cynicism Self-employed 47 0.51 0.86 0.13 0 0 0 1.00 3
Professional Efficacy Employed full-time 156 2.16 0.65 0.05 0 2 2 3.00 3
Professional Efficacy Employed part-time 18 2.17 0.71 0.17 1 2 2 3.00 3
Professional Efficacy Out of work and looking for work 12 1.58 0.51 0.15 1 1 2 2.00 2
Professional Efficacy Self-employed 47 1.96 0.72 0.11 1 1 2 2.00 3

Burnout by Sector of Activity

Figure 8: Burnout dimensions across sector of activity categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 7: Descriptive statistics for burnout dimensions by sector of activity (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Sector of Activity
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Sector of Activity N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Emotional Exhaustion Consultancy 86 0.81 0.74 0.08 0 0.00 1.0 1 3
Emotional Exhaustion Energy 32 0.77 0.68 0.12 0 0.00 1.0 1 3
Emotional Exhaustion Financial Institution 17 0.69 0.87 0.22 0 0.00 0.5 1 3
Emotional Exhaustion Government 13 0.54 0.52 0.14 0 0.00 1.0 1 1
Emotional Exhaustion Mining and Metals 53 0.84 0.76 0.11 0 0.00 1.0 1 3
Emotional Exhaustion NGO & Foundation 20 0.90 0.55 0.12 0 1.00 1.0 1 2
Cynicism Consultancy 86 0.52 0.91 0.10 0 0.00 0.0 1 3
Cynicism Energy 32 0.68 1.01 0.18 0 0.00 0.0 1 3
Cynicism Financial Institution 17 0.47 0.94 0.23 0 0.00 0.0 0 3
Cynicism Government 13 0.23 0.44 0.12 0 0.00 0.0 0 1
Cynicism Mining and Metals 53 0.58 0.86 0.12 0 0.00 0.0 1 3
Cynicism NGO & Foundation 20 0.40 0.60 0.13 0 0.00 0.0 1 2
Professional Efficacy Consultancy 86 2.02 0.75 0.08 1 1.00 2.0 3 3
Professional Efficacy Energy 32 2.22 0.71 0.12 1 2.00 2.0 3 3
Professional Efficacy Financial Institution 17 1.71 0.47 0.11 1 1.00 2.0 2 2
Professional Efficacy Government 13 2.23 0.60 0.17 1 2.00 2.0 3 3
Professional Efficacy Mining and Metals 53 2.15 0.53 0.07 1 2.00 2.0 2 3
Professional Efficacy NGO & Foundation 20 1.90 0.64 0.14 1 1.75 2.0 2 3

Engagement

Engagement is a positive, fulfilling, and work-related state of mind, non-momentary but rather a persistent and pervasive affective-cognitive state (for more details see Schaufeli, W.B., Martinez, I.M., Pinto, a. M., Salanova, M. and Bakker, A.B. (2002) Burnout and Engagement in University Students: A Cross-National Study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(5), pp. 464–481). Its three core dimensions are:

  • Vigor: High levels of energy and mental resilience while working, with willingness to invest effort;
  • Dedication: A sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, and challenge; and
  • Absorption: Being fully concentrated and happily engrossed in one’s work, with time passing quickly and feeling carried away by the activity.

In our study engagement was measured using one item per dimension, respectively: “At my work, I’m bursting with energy”, “I find the work that I do full of meaning and purpose”, and “Time flies when I am working”.

Figure 9: Average engagement scores (±1 SD) across three dimensions (scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Some of the time, 2 = Most of the time, 3 = Always).
Table 8: Descriptive statistics for work engagement dimensions (scale: 0 - Never, 1 - Some of the time, 2 - Most of the time, 3 - Always).
Dimension N Mean SD Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Vigor 281 1.67 0.74 0 1 2 2 3
Dedication 281 2.16 0.73 0 2 2 3 3
Absorption 281 2.10 0.77 0 2 2 3 3
Note: Higher scores indicate greater work engagement across all dimensions.

Engagement by Gender

Figure 10: Engagement dimensions across gender (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Engagement by Age Categories

Figure 11: Engagement dimensions across age categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 9: Descriptive statistics for engagement dimensions by age category (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Age Category
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Age Category N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Vigor 35 or younger 25 1.40 0.71 0.14 0 1 1 2 3
Vigor 36–50 137 1.65 0.69 0.06 0 1 2 2 3
Vigor 51 or older 59 1.95 0.76 0.10 0 1 2 2 3
Dedication 35 or younger 25 1.96 0.73 0.15 1 1 2 2 3
Dedication 36–50 137 2.20 0.75 0.06 0 2 2 3 3
Dedication 51 or older 59 2.29 0.67 0.09 1 2 2 3 3
Absorption 35 or younger 25 1.92 0.86 0.17 0 1 2 3 3
Absorption 36–50 137 2.17 0.76 0.07 0 2 2 3 3
Absorption 51 or older 59 2.14 0.71 0.09 1 2 2 3 3

Engagement by Years of Experience

Figure 12: Engagement dimensions across years of experience categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 10: Descriptive statistics for engagement dimensions by years of experience (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Years of Experience
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Years of Experience N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Vigor 5 or less 23 1.61 0.84 0.17 0 1 2 2 3
Vigor 6–10 52 1.77 0.73 0.10 1 1 2 2 3
Vigor 11–20 117 1.68 0.79 0.07 0 1 2 2 3
Vigor 21 or more 51 1.71 0.61 0.09 1 1 2 2 3
Dedication 5 or less 23 1.91 0.90 0.19 1 1 2 3 3
Dedication 6–10 52 2.21 0.64 0.09 1 2 2 3 3
Dedication 11–20 117 2.24 0.76 0.07 0 2 2 3 3
Dedication 21 or more 51 2.18 0.62 0.09 1 2 2 3 3
Absorption 5 or less 23 1.91 0.95 0.20 0 1 2 3 3
Absorption 6–10 52 2.27 0.74 0.10 1 2 2 3 3
Absorption 11–20 117 2.15 0.74 0.07 0 2 2 3 3
Absorption 21 or more 51 2.04 0.72 0.10 1 2 2 3 3

Engagement by Residence Region

Figure 13: Engagement dimensions across residence regions (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 11: Descriptive statistics for engagement dimensions by residence region (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Residence Region
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Residence Region N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Vigor Asia 12 1.42 0.79 0.23 0 1.00 1.0 2.0 3
Vigor Australia 36 1.49 0.61 0.10 0 1.00 1.0 2.0 3
Vigor Canada 10 1.50 0.85 0.27 0 1.00 1.5 2.0 3
Vigor Europe/UK 83 1.56 0.72 0.08 0 1.00 1.5 2.0 3
Vigor Latin America 41 1.98 0.76 0.12 1 1.00 2.0 3.0 3
Vigor Other 5 1.80 0.84 0.37 1 1.00 2.0 2.0 3
Vigor Sub-Saharan Africa 61 1.93 0.75 0.10 0 2.00 2.0 2.0 3
Vigor USA 15 1.40 0.63 0.16 1 1.00 1.0 2.0 3
Dedication Asia 12 2.08 0.79 0.23 1 1.75 2.0 3.0 3
Dedication Australia 36 1.92 0.65 0.11 1 1.75 2.0 2.0 3
Dedication Canada 10 2.20 0.79 0.25 1 2.00 2.0 3.0 3
Dedication Europe/UK 83 1.99 0.69 0.08 1 2.00 2.0 2.0 3
Dedication Latin America 41 2.39 0.70 0.11 1 2.00 3.0 3.0 3
Dedication Other 5 2.60 0.55 0.24 2 2.00 3.0 3.0 3
Dedication Sub-Saharan Africa 61 2.44 0.74 0.10 0 2.00 3.0 3.0 3
Dedication USA 15 2.07 0.70 0.18 1 2.00 2.0 2.5 3
Absorption Asia 12 2.58 0.51 0.15 2 2.00 3.0 3.0 3
Absorption Australia 36 1.78 0.76 0.13 0 1.00 2.0 2.0 3
Absorption Canada 10 2.50 0.53 0.17 2 2.00 2.5 3.0 3
Absorption Europe/UK 83 1.96 0.74 0.08 1 1.00 2.0 2.5 3
Absorption Latin America 41 2.12 0.75 0.12 1 2.00 2.0 3.0 3
Absorption Other 5 2.40 0.55 0.24 2 2.00 2.0 3.0 3
Absorption Sub-Saharan Africa 61 2.36 0.75 0.10 0 2.00 3.0 3.0 3
Absorption USA 15 1.67 0.72 0.19 1 1.00 2.0 2.0 3

Engagement by Education Categories

Figure 14: Engagement dimensions across education categories (±1 SE). Scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Some of the time, 2 = Most of the time, 3 = Always.
Table 12: Descriptive statistics for engagement dimensions by education category (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Education Category
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Education Category N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Vigor Bachelor's 47 1.52 0.75 0.11 0 1 1 2 3
Vigor Master's 188 1.71 0.75 0.05 0 1 2 2 3
Vigor Doctoral 37 1.68 0.71 0.12 0 1 2 2 3
Dedication Bachelor's 47 2.28 0.71 0.10 1 2 2 3 3
Dedication Master's 188 2.16 0.73 0.05 0 2 2 3 3
Dedication Doctoral 37 2.11 0.74 0.12 1 2 2 3 3
Absorption Bachelor's 47 1.89 0.67 0.10 0 2 2 2 3
Absorption Master's 188 2.15 0.78 0.06 0 2 2 3 3
Absorption Doctoral 37 2.11 0.74 0.12 1 2 2 3 3

Engagement by Employment Status

Figure 15: Engagement dimensions across employment status categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 13: Descriptive statistics for engagement dimensions by employment status (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Employment Status
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Employment Status N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Vigor Employed full-time 156 1.73 0.75 0.06 0 1.00 2.0 2 3
Vigor Employed part-time 18 1.61 0.70 0.16 1 1.00 1.5 2 3
Vigor Out of work and looking for work 12 1.42 0.51 0.15 1 1.00 1.0 2 2
Vigor Self-employed 47 1.83 0.74 0.11 0 1.00 2.0 2 3
Dedication Employed full-time 156 2.22 0.73 0.06 0 2.00 2.0 3 3
Dedication Employed part-time 18 2.06 0.64 0.15 1 2.00 2.0 2 3
Dedication Out of work and looking for work 12 2.25 0.62 0.18 1 2.00 2.0 3 3
Dedication Self-employed 47 2.26 0.71 0.10 1 2.00 2.0 3 3
Absorption Employed full-time 156 2.17 0.77 0.06 0 2.00 2.0 3 3
Absorption Employed part-time 18 2.17 0.51 0.12 1 2.00 2.0 2 3
Absorption Out of work and looking for work 12 1.75 0.45 0.13 1 1.75 2.0 2 2
Absorption Self-employed 47 2.15 0.81 0.12 1 1.50 2.0 3 3

Engagement by Sector of Activity

Figure 16: Engagement dimensions across sector of activity categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 14: Descriptive statistics for engagement dimensions by sector of activity (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Sector of Activity
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Sector of Activity N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Vigor Consultancy 86 1.73 0.73 0.08 0 1 2.0 2 3
Vigor Energy 32 2.00 0.77 0.14 1 1 2.0 3 3
Vigor Financial Institution 17 1.47 0.72 0.17 1 1 1.0 2 3
Vigor Government 13 1.69 0.85 0.24 0 1 2.0 2 3
Vigor Mining and Metals 53 1.64 0.68 0.09 0 1 2.0 2 3
Vigor NGO & Foundation 20 1.50 0.61 0.14 1 1 1.0 2 3
Dedication Consultancy 86 2.22 0.77 0.08 0 2 2.0 3 3
Dedication Energy 32 2.38 0.71 0.12 1 2 2.5 3 3
Dedication Financial Institution 17 1.76 0.56 0.14 1 1 2.0 2 3
Dedication Government 13 2.31 0.75 0.21 1 2 2.0 3 3
Dedication Mining and Metals 53 2.25 0.70 0.10 1 2 2.0 3 3
Dedication NGO & Foundation 20 2.00 0.65 0.15 1 2 2.0 2 3
Absorption Consultancy 86 2.17 0.77 0.08 0 2 2.0 3 3
Absorption Energy 32 2.16 0.68 0.12 1 2 2.0 3 3
Absorption Financial Institution 17 1.82 0.64 0.15 1 1 2.0 2 3
Absorption Government 13 2.38 0.87 0.24 1 2 3.0 3 3
Absorption Mining and Metals 53 2.13 0.79 0.11 0 2 2.0 3 3
Absorption NGO & Foundation 20 2.00 0.79 0.18 1 1 2.0 3 3

Well-being

Well-being as defined here includes two dimensions:

  • Perceived Happiness: A global cognitive judgment of one’s life quality based on self-chosen criteria, reflecting an individual’s overall evaluation of how satisfied they are with their life as a whole rather than momentary emotional states (for more details see Diener, E., Emmons, R.A., Larsen, R.J. and Griffin, S. (1985) “The satisfaction with life scale,” Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, pp. 71–75).
  • Perceived Health: An individual’s subjective evaluation of their current health status, encompassing perceptions of general health quality, resistance to illness, and expectations about future health functioning, independent of clinical diagnoses (for more details see Ware, J.E. and Sherbourne, C.D. (1992) The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) I. Conceptual Framework and Item Selection).

In our study perceived happiness and heath were measured using one item per dimension, respectively: “Considering all aspects of your life, how happy would you say you feel?” and “In general, would you say your health is?”.

Figure 17: Well-being scores (±1 SD) across happiness and health dimensions (scale: 1 = Very low to 5 = Very high).
Table 15: Descriptive statistics for well-being dimensions.
Dimension N Mean SD Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Happiness 281 4.05 0.85 1 4 4 5 5
Health 281 3.40 0.95 1 3 3 4 5
Note: Note: Higher scores indicate greater well-being on both dimensions. Scale: 1 = Very low, 2 = Low, 3 = Moderate, 4 = High, 5 = Very high.

Well-being by Gender

Figure 18: Well-being scores across age categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Well-being by Age Categories

Figure 19: Well-being scores across age categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 16: Descriptive statistics for well-being dimensions by age category (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Age Category
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Age Category N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Happiness 35 or younger 25 4.00 0.76 0.15 1 4 4 4 5
Happiness 36–50 137 4.06 0.86 0.07 1 4 4 5 5
Happiness 51 or older 59 4.16 0.72 0.09 1 4 4 5 5
Health 35 or younger 25 3.16 0.85 0.17 1 3 3 4 4
Health 36–50 137 3.40 0.96 0.08 1 3 3 4 5
Health 51 or older 59 3.49 0.90 0.12 1 3 3 4 5

Well-being by Years of Experience

Figure 20: Well-being scores across years of experience categories (±1 SE). Scale: 1 = Very low, 2 = Low, 3 = Moderate, 4 = High, 5 = Very high.
Table 17: Descriptive statistics for well-being dimensions by years of experience (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Years of Experience
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Years of Experience N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Happiness 5 or less 23 3.78 0.90 0.19 1 4 4 4 5
Happiness 6–10 52 3.84 0.73 0.10 2 4 4 4 5
Happiness 11–20 117 4.16 0.93 0.09 1 4 4 5 5
Happiness 21 or more 51 4.06 0.73 0.10 2 4 4 4 5
Health 5 or less 23 3.26 0.92 0.19 1 3 3 4 5
Health 6–10 52 3.25 0.86 0.12 1 3 3 4 5
Health 11–20 117 3.42 1.03 0.09 1 3 3 4 5
Health 21 or more 51 3.58 0.91 0.13 1 3 4 4 5

Well-being by Residence Region

Figure 21: Well-being scores across residence regions (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 18: Descriptive statistics for well-being dimensions by residence region (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Residence Region
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Residence Region N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Happiness Asia 12 4.33 0.49 0.14 4 4 4 5.00 5
Happiness Australia 36 4.06 0.81 0.14 1 4 4 4.00 5
Happiness Canada 10 4.10 0.57 0.18 3 4 4 4.00 5
Happiness Europe/UK 83 3.94 0.78 0.09 2 4 4 4.00 5
Happiness Latin America 41 4.51 0.60 0.10 3 4 5 5.00 5
Happiness Other 5 4.00 0.71 0.32 3 4 4 4.00 5
Happiness Sub-Saharan Africa 61 3.88 1.03 0.13 1 4 4 4.25 5
Happiness USA 15 3.86 1.29 0.35 1 4 4 5.00 5
Health Asia 12 3.08 0.51 0.15 2 3 3 3.00 4
Health Australia 36 3.52 0.87 0.15 1 3 3 4.00 5
Health Canada 10 4.00 0.82 0.26 2 4 4 4.00 5
Health Europe/UK 83 3.32 0.98 0.11 1 3 3 4.00 5
Health Latin America 41 3.51 0.97 0.16 2 3 4 4.00 5
Health Other 5 3.60 1.14 0.51 2 3 4 4.00 5
Health Sub-Saharan Africa 61 3.44 0.94 0.12 1 3 3 4.00 5
Health USA 15 3.46 0.66 0.18 2 3 4 4.00 4

Well-being by Education Categories

Figure 22: Well-being scores across education categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 19: Descriptive statistics for well-being dimensions by education category (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Education Category
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Education Category N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Happiness Bachelor's 47 4.11 0.80 0.12 1 4 4 5 5
Happiness Master's 188 4.02 0.88 0.07 1 4 4 5 5
Happiness Doctoral 37 4.00 0.78 0.13 2 4 4 4 5
Health Bachelor's 47 3.24 0.82 0.12 1 3 3 4 5
Health Master's 188 3.41 0.98 0.07 1 3 3 4 5
Health Doctoral 37 3.51 0.99 0.16 2 3 3 4 5

Well-being by Employment Status

Figure 23: Well-being scores across employment status categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 20: Descriptive statistics for well-being dimensions by employment status (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Employment Status
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Employment Status N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Happiness Employed full-time 156 4.03 0.92 0.07 1 4.00 4.0 5.00 5
Happiness Employed part-time 18 4.33 0.59 0.14 3 4.00 4.0 5.00 5
Happiness Out of work and looking for work 12 3.58 0.79 0.23 2 3.75 4.0 4.00 4
Happiness Self-employed 47 4.11 0.57 0.08 2 4.00 4.0 4.00 5
Health Employed full-time 156 3.35 0.99 0.08 1 3.00 3.0 4.00 5
Health Employed part-time 18 3.61 0.98 0.23 2 3.00 3.5 4.00 5
Health Out of work and looking for work 12 3.00 0.74 0.21 2 2.75 3.0 3.25 4
Health Self-employed 47 3.61 0.88 0.13 2 3.00 4.0 4.00 5

Well-being by Sector of Activity

Figure 24: Well-being scores across sector of activity categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 21: Descriptive statistics for well-being dimensions by sector of activity (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Sector of Activity
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Sector of Activity N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Happiness Consultancy 86 4.19 0.72 0.08 1 4 4.0 5.00 5
Happiness Energy 32 4.03 0.82 0.15 2 4 4.0 4.25 5
Happiness Financial Institution 17 3.88 0.70 0.17 2 4 4.0 4.00 5
Happiness Government 13 4.00 0.82 0.23 2 4 4.0 4.00 5
Happiness Mining and Metals 53 4.00 0.98 0.13 1 4 4.0 5.00 5
Happiness NGO & Foundation 20 4.11 0.81 0.19 2 4 4.0 5.00 5
Health Consultancy 86 3.55 0.89 0.10 1 3 3.5 4.00 5
Health Energy 32 3.66 0.87 0.15 2 3 4.0 4.00 5
Health Financial Institution 17 3.06 1.03 0.25 1 2 3.0 4.00 5
Health Government 13 3.38 1.12 0.31 2 3 3.0 4.00 5
Health Mining and Metals 53 3.29 0.89 0.12 1 3 3.0 4.00 5
Health NGO & Foundation 20 2.95 0.94 0.21 1 2 3.0 4.00 4

Personal Values

Values are defined as desirable goals, extrinsically liked to beliefs and affects motivating action across situations, and serving as guiding principles in peoples’ lives. According to Schwartz’s theory, human values are organized around a quasi-circular structure of 10 universal values organized into four higher-order dimensions (for more details see Schwartz, S.H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, pp. 1–65). These four dimensions are operationalized as follows:

  • Openness to Change: Prioritizing independent thought, action, and readiness for new experiences (Self-Direction, Stimulation, Hedonism);
  • Self Enhancement: Pursuing personal success and dominance through competence and social superiority (Power, Achievement, Hedonism);
  • Self Transcendence: Promoting the welfare of others and transcendence of selfish interests (Universalism, Benevolence); and
  • Conservation: Emphasizing safety, conformity, and preservation of the social and personal status quo (Tradition, Conformity, Security).

Schwartz’s four higher-order dimensions can be organized by their personal vs.social focus and anxiety-based self-protection vs. anxiety-free self-expansion:

Personal Focus Social Focus
Anxiety-based and Self-protection Conservation
Security, Conformity, Tradition
(Preserve status quo)		 Self-enhancement
Power, Achievement, Hedonism
(Dominance, personal gain)
Anxiety-free and Self-expansion Openness to change
Self-Direction, Stimulation, Hedonism
(Autonomy, new experiences)		 Self-transcendence
Universalism, Benevolence
(Others’ welfare)

In our study, we measured values using the 10-item Short Schwartz’s Values Survey (SSVS), with one item per value rated on a 0–5 scale (0 = Opposed to my principles; 5 = Of supreme importance). For multivariate analysis (correlations, regressions, etc.) we followed Schwartz’s recommended methodology and first computed each participants’ mean rating across all 10 items followed by centering individual item scores around this personal mean to remove response style bias.

Figure 25: Personal values scores (±1 SD) across three dimensions (scale: 1 = Not Important, 3 = Important, 5 = Of Supreme Importance).

Values by Gender

Figure 26: Values scores across age categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Values by Age Categories

Figure 27: Values scores across age categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Values by Years of Experience

Figure 28: Values scores across Years of Experience (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Values by Residence Region

Figure 29: Values scores across Residence Region (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Values by Education Categories

Figure 30: Values scores across Education Categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Values by by Employment Status

Figure 31: Values scores across Employment Status (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Values by Sector of Activity

Figure 32: Values scores across Sector of Activity (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Work Identity

Social identity is considered a multidimensional construct reflecting the psychological significance of group membership to the self. It goes beyond social identity as a unidimensional sense of “group belonging” and distinguishes cognitive (centrality), affective (ingroup affect), and relational (ingroup ties) dimensions, each capturing unique aspects of how individuals subjectively experience and enact their group memberships within social contexts (for more details see Cameron, J.E. (2004). A Three-Factor Model of Social Identity. Self and Identity, 3(3), pp. 239–262). It is operationalized through three distinct components:

  • Centrality: The importance and salience of group membership to one’s self-concept;
  • Ingroup Affect: The positive emotional attachment and pride associated with group membership; and
  • Ingroup Ties: The perceived interconnection, similarity, and sense of belonging with fellow group members.

In our study, we considered work identity - the social identity stemming from professional belonging - and measured it using an adapted three-item scale derived from Cameron’s (2004) Three-Factor Model of Social Identity. Each item assessed one dimension—centrality, ingroup affect, and ingroup ties—with wording tailored to the professional context (e.g., “Being a social/human rights practitioner is the most important aspect of my self-image”). The three items for work identity were computed into single composite variable named Work Identity with moderate internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.63).

Figure 33: Work identity scores (±1 SD) across three dimensions (scale: 1 = Very low, to 5 = Very high).
Table 22: Descriptive statistics for work identity dimensions (scale: 1 = Very low, to 5 = Very high).
Dimension N Mean SD Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Centrality 281 3.52 1.06 1 3 4 4 5
Ingroup Affection 281 4.44 0.77 2 4 5 5 5
Ingroup Ties 281 4.00 0.87 1 3 4 5 5

Work Identity by Gender

Figure 34: Identity scores across age categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Work Identity by Age Categories

Figure 35: Identity scores across age categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 23: Descriptive statistics for identity dimensions by age category (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Age Category
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Age Category N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Centrality 35 or younger 28 3.46 1.10 0.21 1 3 3 4 5
Centrality 36–50 161 3.50 1.06 0.08 1 3 3 4 5
Centrality 51 or older 69 3.59 1.05 0.13 1 3 4 4 5
Ingroup Affection 35 or younger 28 4.39 0.92 0.17 2 4 5 5 5
Ingroup Affection 36–50 161 4.48 0.73 0.06 2 4 5 5 5
Ingroup Affection 51 or older 69 4.36 0.84 0.10 2 4 5 5 5
Ingroup Ties 35 or younger 28 3.86 1.04 0.20 1 3 4 5 5
Ingroup Ties 36–50 161 4.03 0.85 0.07 1 4 4 5 5
Ingroup Ties 51 or older 69 4.00 0.84 0.10 2 3 4 5 5

Work Identity by Years of Experience

Figure 36: Identity scores across years of experience categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 24: Descriptive statistics for identity dimensions by years of experience (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Years of Experience
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Years of Experience N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Centrality 5 or less 22 3.45 1.18 0.25 1 3.0 3.5 4 5
Centrality 6–10 49 3.51 1.17 0.17 1 3.0 3.0 5 5
Centrality 11–20 115 3.56 0.98 0.09 1 3.0 4.0 4 5
Centrality 21 or more 48 3.46 1.09 0.16 1 3.0 3.0 4 5
Ingroup Affection 5 or less 22 4.36 0.95 0.20 2 4.0 5.0 5 5
Ingroup Affection 6–10 49 4.49 0.68 0.10 3 4.0 5.0 5 5
Ingroup Affection 11–20 115 4.41 0.79 0.07 2 4.0 5.0 5 5
Ingroup Affection 21 or more 48 4.58 0.71 0.10 2 4.0 5.0 5 5
Ingroup Ties 5 or less 22 3.82 1.26 0.27 1 3.0 4.0 5 5
Ingroup Ties 6–10 49 4.02 0.80 0.11 2 3.0 4.0 5 5
Ingroup Ties 11–20 115 4.03 0.80 0.07 2 3.5 4.0 5 5
Ingroup Ties 21 or more 48 4.21 0.77 0.11 2 4.0 4.0 5 5

Work Identity by Residence Region

Figure 37: Identity scores across residence regions (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 25: Descriptive statistics for identity dimensions by residence region (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Residence Region
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Residence Region N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Centrality Asia 11 3.82 1.17 0.35 2 3.00 3.0 5 5
Centrality Australia 32 2.88 0.91 0.16 1 2.00 3.0 3 5
Centrality Canada 10 3.40 0.84 0.27 2 3.00 4.0 4 4
Centrality Europe/UK 77 3.31 0.96 0.11 1 3.00 3.0 4 5
Centrality Latin America 37 3.43 0.96 0.16 2 3.00 3.0 4 5
Centrality Other 5 4.20 0.84 0.37 3 4.00 4.0 5 5
Centrality Sub-Saharan Africa 58 4.07 1.04 0.14 1 4.00 4.0 5 5
Centrality USA 14 3.29 0.99 0.27 2 2.25 3.5 4 5
Ingroup Affection Asia 11 4.64 0.67 0.20 3 4.50 5.0 5 5
Ingroup Affection Australia 32 4.44 0.84 0.15 2 4.00 5.0 5 5
Ingroup Affection Canada 10 4.50 0.53 0.17 4 4.00 4.5 5 5
Ingroup Affection Europe/UK 77 4.29 0.76 0.09 2 4.00 4.0 5 5
Ingroup Affection Latin America 37 4.54 0.77 0.13 2 4.00 5.0 5 5
Ingroup Affection Other 5 4.20 0.84 0.37 3 4.00 4.0 5 5
Ingroup Affection Sub-Saharan Africa 58 4.55 0.78 0.10 2 4.00 5.0 5 5
Ingroup Affection USA 14 4.71 0.47 0.13 4 4.25 5.0 5 5
Ingroup Ties Asia 11 3.64 0.92 0.28 2 3.00 4.0 4 5
Ingroup Ties Australia 32 3.84 0.99 0.17 1 3.00 4.0 5 5
Ingroup Ties Canada 10 4.40 0.70 0.22 3 4.00 4.5 5 5
Ingroup Ties Europe/UK 77 3.88 0.86 0.10 1 4.00 4.0 4 5
Ingroup Ties Latin America 37 3.81 0.84 0.14 2 3.00 4.0 4 5
Ingroup Ties Other 5 4.20 0.84 0.37 3 4.00 4.0 5 5
Ingroup Ties Sub-Saharan Africa 58 4.31 0.78 0.10 3 4.00 4.5 5 5
Ingroup Ties USA 14 4.29 0.61 0.16 3 4.00 4.0 5 5

Work Identity by Education Categories

Figure 38: Identity scores across education categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 26: Descriptive statistics for identity dimensions by education category (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Education Category
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Education Category N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Centrality Bachelor's 45 3.49 1.18 0.18 1 3 4 4 5
Centrality Master's 173 3.52 1.04 0.08 1 3 4 4 5
Centrality Doctoral 34 3.71 1.00 0.17 2 3 4 4 5
Ingroup Affection Bachelor's 45 4.44 0.78 0.12 2 4 5 5 5
Ingroup Affection Master's 173 4.47 0.75 0.06 2 4 5 5 5
Ingroup Affection Doctoral 34 4.35 0.81 0.14 2 4 5 5 5
Ingroup Ties Bachelor's 45 4.09 0.90 0.13 1 4 4 5 5
Ingroup Ties Master's 173 3.99 0.85 0.06 1 3 4 5 5
Ingroup Ties Doctoral 34 4.06 0.89 0.15 2 4 4 5 5

Work Identity by Employment Status

Figure 39: Identity scores across employment status categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 27: Descriptive statistics for identity dimensions by employment status (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Employment Status
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Employment Status N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Centrality Employed full-time 150 3.51 1.05 0.09 1 3.00 3.5 4.00 5
Centrality Employed part-time 18 3.56 1.29 0.30 1 3.00 4.0 4.75 5
Centrality Out of work and looking for work 11 3.73 0.90 0.27 2 3.00 4.0 4.00 5
Centrality Self-employed 45 3.47 0.99 0.15 1 3.00 3.0 4.00 5
Ingroup Affection Employed full-time 150 4.45 0.77 0.06 2 4.00 5.0 5.00 5
Ingroup Affection Employed part-time 18 4.61 0.70 0.16 3 4.25 5.0 5.00 5
Ingroup Affection Out of work and looking for work 11 4.45 0.69 0.21 3 4.00 5.0 5.00 5
Ingroup Affection Self-employed 45 4.47 0.76 0.11 2 4.00 5.0 5.00 5
Ingroup Ties Employed full-time 150 4.07 0.86 0.07 1 4.00 4.0 5.00 5
Ingroup Ties Employed part-time 18 4.00 0.84 0.20 3 3.00 4.0 5.00 5
Ingroup Ties Out of work and looking for work 11 4.09 0.70 0.21 3 4.00 4.0 4.50 5
Ingroup Ties Self-employed 45 4.13 0.76 0.11 2 4.00 4.0 5.00 5

Work Identity by Sector of Activity

Figure 40: Identity scores across sector of activity categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 28: Descriptive statistics for identity dimensions by sector of activity (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Sector of Activity
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Sector of Activity N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Centrality Consultancy 81 3.48 1.14 0.13 1 3.00 3 4 5
Centrality Energy 32 3.78 0.87 0.15 2 3.00 4 4 5
Centrality Financial Institution 16 3.00 0.89 0.22 1 2.75 3 4 4
Centrality Government 13 4.00 1.08 0.30 1 4.00 4 5 5
Centrality Mining and Metals 51 3.39 1.06 0.15 1 3.00 3 4 5
Centrality NGO & Foundation 19 3.58 0.96 0.22 1 3.00 4 4 5
Ingroup Affection Consultancy 81 4.44 0.84 0.09 2 4.00 5 5 5
Ingroup Affection Energy 32 4.59 0.67 0.12 3 4.00 5 5 5
Ingroup Affection Financial Institution 16 3.94 0.93 0.23 3 3.00 4 5 5
Ingroup Affection Government 13 4.46 0.88 0.24 2 4.00 5 5 5
Ingroup Affection Mining and Metals 51 4.59 0.70 0.10 2 4.00 5 5 5
Ingroup Affection NGO & Foundation 19 4.42 0.69 0.16 3 4.00 5 5 5
Ingroup Ties Consultancy 81 4.01 0.87 0.10 1 3.00 4 5 5
Ingroup Ties Energy 32 4.25 0.76 0.13 2 4.00 4 5 5
Ingroup Ties Financial Institution 16 3.88 0.81 0.20 2 3.75 4 4 5
Ingroup Ties Government 13 4.08 1.04 0.29 2 3.00 4 5 5
Ingroup Ties Mining and Metals 51 4.08 0.87 0.12 1 4.00 4 5 5
Ingroup Ties NGO & Foundation 19 3.79 0.71 0.16 3 3.00 4 4 5

Work-Life Balance

Work-life balance refers to the accomplishment of role-related expectations that are negotiated and shared between an individual and his or her role-related partners in the work and personal life domains (for more details see Grzywacz, J.G. and Carlson, D.S. (2007) “Conceptualizing Work Family Balance: Implications for Practice and Research,” Advances in Developing Human Resources, 9(4), pp. 455–471). Work-life balance has the following key characteristics:

  • Accomplishment, not satisfaction: It emphasizes effectively meeting responsibilities in both domains rather than subjective feelings of satisfaction;
  • Social construct: Balance is shaped through social interactions and negotiations with role partners (e.g., supervisors, coworkers, family members), not merely an individual’s internal appraisal;
  • Negotiated expectations: Role expectations are actively constructed through ongoing interactions rather than fixed or imposed unilaterally;
  • Theoretically grounded: Built on role theory and role balance theory, emphasizing that individuals can be fully engaged in both work and family roles simultaneously.

In our study work-life balance was measured using three items for negative work-to-life spillover (e.g., “Stress at work makes me irritable at home”) and three items for positive work-to-life spillover (e.g., “The things I do at work make me a more interesting person in my personal life”). The items were computed into composite scales with moderate to low internal consistency (respectively, with Cronbach’s alphas of 0.68 and 0.45).

Figure 41: Work-life spillover scores (±1 SD) across negative and positive dimensions (scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Some of the time, 2 = Most of the time, 3 = Always).
Table 29: Descriptive statistics for work-life spillover dimensions (scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Some of the time, 2 = Most of the time, 3 = Always).
Dimension N Mean SD Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Negative Spillover 281 1.21 0.57 0.00 1.00 1 1.33 3
Positive Spillover 281 2.04 0.57 0.33 1.67 2 2.33 3
Note: Note: Higher scores indicate greater spillover frequency. Negative spillover reflects work interfering with personal life. Positive spillover reflects work enhancing personal life.

Work-Life Balance by Gender

Figure 42: Work-life spillover scores across age categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Work-Life Balance by Age Categories

Figure 43: Work-life spillover scores across age categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 30: Descriptive statistics for work-life spillover dimensions by age category (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Age Category
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Age Category N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Negative Spillover 35 or younger 25 1.23 0.49 0.10 0.33 1.00 1.33 1.33 2.67
Negative Spillover 36–50 132 1.27 0.58 0.05 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 3.00
Negative Spillover 51 or older 55 0.95 0.44 0.06 0.00 0.67 1.00 1.00 2.00
Positive Spillover 35 or younger 25 1.91 0.51 0.10 1.00 1.67 1.67 2.33 3.00
Positive Spillover 36–50 132 2.10 0.56 0.05 0.33 1.67 2.17 2.67 3.00
Positive Spillover 51 or older 55 2.06 0.60 0.08 0.67 1.67 2.00 2.67 3.00

Work-Life Balance by Years of Experience

Figure 44: Work-life spillover scores across years of experience categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 31: Descriptive statistics for work-life spillover dimensions by years of experience (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Years of Experience
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Years of Experience N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Negative Spillover 5 or less 23 1.20 0.42 0.09 0.33 1.00 1.33 1.50 1.67
Negative Spillover 6–10 52 1.17 0.45 0.06 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.33 3.00
Negative Spillover 11–20 117 1.26 0.65 0.06 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 3.00
Negative Spillover 21 or more 51 1.04 0.53 0.07 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.17 3.00
Positive Spillover 5 or less 23 1.78 0.70 0.15 0.33 1.33 1.67 2.17 3.00
Positive Spillover 6–10 52 2.10 0.53 0.07 1.00 1.67 2.00 2.67 3.00
Positive Spillover 11–20 117 2.06 0.55 0.05 1.00 1.67 2.00 2.33 3.00
Positive Spillover 21 or more 51 2.09 0.56 0.08 0.67 1.67 2.00 2.67 3.00

Work-Life Balance by Residence Region

Figure 45: Work-life spillover scores across residence regions (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 32: Descriptive statistics for work-life spillover dimensions by residence region (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Residence Region
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Residence Region N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Negative Spillover Asia 12 1.11 0.52 0.15 0.33 0.67 1.17 1.33 2.33
Negative Spillover Australia 36 1.28 0.50 0.08 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.42 2.67
Negative Spillover Canada 10 1.07 0.77 0.24 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.33 2.67
Negative Spillover Europe/UK 83 1.19 0.46 0.05 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.33 3.00
Negative Spillover Latin America 41 1.22 0.54 0.08 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 2.33
Negative Spillover Other 5 1.60 1.01 0.45 0.67 1.00 1.00 2.33 3.00
Negative Spillover Sub-Saharan Africa 61 1.08 0.66 0.08 0.00 0.67 1.00 1.33 3.00
Negative Spillover USA 15 1.20 0.48 0.13 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.33 2.33
Positive Spillover Asia 12 1.86 0.58 0.17 1.00 1.58 2.00 2.08 3.00
Positive Spillover Australia 36 2.03 0.55 0.09 0.33 1.67 2.00 2.42 3.00
Positive Spillover Canada 10 2.03 0.55 0.18 1.00 1.67 2.17 2.33 3.00
Positive Spillover Europe/UK 83 1.96 0.55 0.06 0.67 1.67 2.00 2.33 3.00
Positive Spillover Latin America 41 2.18 0.61 0.09 1.00 1.67 2.33 2.67 3.00
Positive Spillover Other 5 1.93 0.28 0.12 1.67 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.33
Positive Spillover Sub-Saharan Africa 61 2.13 0.56 0.07 0.67 1.67 2.33 2.67 3.00
Positive Spillover USA 15 2.04 0.60 0.16 0.67 1.67 2.00 2.50 3.00

Work-Life Balance by Education Categories

Figure 46: Work-life spillover scores across education categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

?(caption)

Dimension
Education Category
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension
Education Category
N
Mean
SD
SE
Min
Q1
Median
Q3
Max
Negative Spillover
Bachelor’s
47
1.09
0.49
0.07
0.00
1.00
1.00
1.33
2.67
Negative Spillover
Master’s
188
1.22
0.58
0.04
0.00
1.00
1.00
1.67
3.00
Negative Spillover
Doctoral
37
1.30
0.59
0.10
0.33
1.00
1.00
1.33
3.00
Positive Spillover
Bachelor’s
47
2.17
0.51
0.07
1.00
1.67
2.33
2.58
3.00
Positive Spillover
Master’s
188
2.00
0.58
0.04
0.33
1.67
2.00
2.33
3.00
Positive Spillover
Doctoral
37
1.99
0.54
0.09
1.00
1.67
2.00
2.33
3.00

Work-life spillover scores across education categories (±1 SE). Scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Some of the time, 2 = Most of the time, 3 = Always.

Work-Life Balance by Employment Status

Figure 47: Work-life spillover scores across employment status categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 33: Descriptive statistics for work-life spillover dimensions by employment status (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Employment Status
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Employment Status N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Negative Spillover Employed full-time 156 1.19 0.58 0.05 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 3.00
Negative Spillover Employed part-time 18 1.26 0.70 0.17 0.00 1.00 1.17 1.58 2.67
Negative Spillover Out of work and looking for work 12 1.28 0.57 0.16 0.00 1.00 1.17 1.67 2.00
Negative Spillover Self-employed 47 1.07 0.49 0.07 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.17 3.00
Positive Spillover Employed full-time 156 2.04 0.58 0.05 0.33 1.67 2.00 2.38 3.00
Positive Spillover Employed part-time 18 2.06 0.51 0.12 1.00 1.67 2.00 2.62 2.67
Positive Spillover Out of work and looking for work 12 2.04 0.51 0.15 1.33 1.67 1.83 2.38 3.00
Positive Spillover Self-employed 47 2.02 0.59 0.09 0.67 1.67 2.00 2.33 3.00

Work-Life Balance by Sector of Activity

Figure 48: Work-life spillover scores across sector of activity categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 34: Descriptive statistics for work-life spillover dimensions by sector of activity (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Sector of Activity
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Sector of Activity N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Negative Spillover Consultancy 86 1.22 0.58 0.06 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 3.00
Negative Spillover Energy 32 1.12 0.61 0.11 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 3.00
Negative Spillover Financial Institution 17 1.18 0.41 0.10 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.33 2.00
Negative Spillover Government 13 0.97 0.48 0.13 0.33 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.67
Negative Spillover Mining and Metals 53 1.19 0.53 0.07 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 2.67
Negative Spillover NGO & Foundation 20 1.20 0.57 0.13 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.67 2.00
Positive Spillover Consultancy 86 2.07 0.60 0.06 0.67 1.67 2.00 2.67 3.00
Positive Spillover Energy 32 2.18 0.51 0.09 1.00 1.92 2.33 2.67 3.00
Positive Spillover Financial Institution 17 1.84 0.49 0.12 1.00 1.33 2.00 2.00 3.00
Positive Spillover Government 13 1.77 0.75 0.21 0.33 1.33 2.00 2.33 2.67
Positive Spillover Mining and Metals 53 2.19 0.50 0.07 1.33 1.67 2.33 2.67 3.00
Positive Spillover NGO & Foundation 20 1.91 0.46 0.10 1.33 1.67 1.67 2.33 3.00