Abstract ▼ AI-Helper

The dimensionality and validity of the BM (Burnout Measure) is investigated in Dutch samples of human services professionals and white‐collar workers (total N = 2190). Results show that, in contrast to the presumed dimensions ‘physical exhaustion’, ‘emotional exhaustion&rsqu...

The dimensionality and validity of the BM (Burnout Measure) is investigated in Dutch samples of human services professionals and white‐collar workers (total N = 2190). Results show that, in contrast to the presumed dimensions ‘physical exhaustion’, ‘emotional exhaustion’ and ‘mental exhaustion’, the factors of the BM are ‘demoralization’, ‘exhaustion’, and ‘loss of motive’. The factorial structure is not affected by using different time frames although an unrestricted time frame results in significantly higher mean scores. A BM version with a seven‐point Likert scale results in more reliable subscales than a five‐point scale. The factor ‘loss of motive’ is substantially affected by inconsistent answering patterns of the respondents. The three‐factor model of the BM fits equally well in samples of professionals with and without patient contact. The BM subscales correlate highly with fatigue and with the dimension ‘emotional exhaustion’ of the Maslach‐Burnout‐Inventory (MBI) but cannot be distinguished from psychological strain and psychosomatic complaints. Problems in the conceptualization of burnout and its operationalization are discussed. It is concluded that the BM captures only a particular aspect of burnout and is rather a measure of general well‐being. Recommendations for further use of a modified BM are given.