como se maneja el estres

1. Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=gpsh20
Psychology & Health
ISSN: 0887-0446 (Print) 1476-8321 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gpsh20
The impact of vacation and job stress on burnout
and absenteeism
Mina Westman & Dalia Etzion
To cite this article: Mina Westman & Dalia Etzion (2001) The impact of vacation and job stress on
burnout and absenteeism, Psychology & Health, 16:5, 595-606, DOI: 10.1080/08870440108405529
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440108405529
Published online: 19 Dec 2007.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 1214
Citing articles: 90 View citing articles

2. Psych~~logy
andHeulfh,2001, Vol. 16,pp. 595406
Reprints available directly from the Publisher
Photocopying permitted by license only
0 2001 OPA (Overseas Publishers Association) N.V.
Published by license under
the Harwood Academic Publishers imprint,
part of Gordon and Breach Publishing,
a member of the Taylor & Francis Group.
Printed in Malaysia.
THE IMPACT OF VACATION AND JOB STRESS ON
BURNOUT AND ABSENTEEISM*
MINA WESTMAN+and DALIA ETZION
Tel Aviv University, Israel
(Infinalform 15January, 2001)
The purpose of the present study was to test the hypothesis that vacation relief decreases psychological and beha-
vioral strains caused byjob stressors. Weexamined the impact ofjob stressand vacation on strain on 87 blue-collar
employees in an industrial enterprise in central Israel. Whereas former respite research focused on the impact of
vacation only on psychological strains such as burnout andjob and life satisfaction, the current study also exam-
ined a behavioral strain, absenteeism. The employees completed questionnaires before and afier vacation and
again four weeks later. Our findings show that vacation alleviated perceivedjob stress and burnout as predicted,
replicating findings that a respite from work diminishes levels of strain to lower than chronic, on-the-joblevels.
We found declines in burnout immediately afier the vacation and a return to prevacation levels four weeks later,
and a similar pattern with regard to absenteeism.
Lounsbury and Hoopes (1986)definedvacation as “a cessationof work, a time when a person
is not actively participatingin his or her job. It is a time when a person is free to pursue other
interests, and therefore a time when the work situation might lose importance compared to
otherdomainsof experiencesuchas family and personal leisure”(p.393).Westman and Eden
(1997),proposingto embedrespiteresearch within Hobfoli’s(1989)conservationof resources
(COR) theory of stress,suggest that vacationsare used as a time to replenish resources,to halt
losscyclesand build gain cycles,thus preventingthe strain resultingfromjob stress.
Following Kahn et al. (1964) and Hackman and Oldham (1975), we definejob stress in
terms of role demands originating in the work environment. Physical (e.g., high blood
pressure, high cholesterol), psychological (e.g., anxiety, burnout), and behavioral strains
(e.g., low performance, absenteeism)are common reactions or outcomesresulting from the
experienceof job stressors(Jex and Beehr, 1991).
According to Lee and Ashforth (1996),burnout has been the most widely studiedcorrelate
of job stress. Defined as a psychological strain resulting from continuous exposure to
chronic daily stressors,burnout is an experienceof physical, mental and emotional exhaus-
tion accompanied by deterioration of performance and negative attitudestowards one’s self
and others(Etzion, 1984;Freudenberger, 1980;Pines et al., 1981).Maslach (1982)concep-
tualized burnout as a three-dimensional experience that includes emotional exhaustion,
depersonalization,and reduced personal accomplishment. Shirom (1989)in his extensive
review of the burnout phenomenonconcludesthat exhaustion is the most importantdimension
* M e w Aharon-Madarcollectedthe data in the field underthe supervisionof MinaWestman and DaliaEtzion as
part of the requirements for her master’s degree in organizational behavior at Tel Aviv University. A preliminary
version of this paper was presented at the SlOP2000 Annual Conference, New Orleans,Louisiana, April 2000.
‘Corresponding author. Tel.: +972 3-6408189; Fax: +972 3-6407739; E-mail: minaw@tauex.tau.ac.il.
595

3. 596 M. WESTMAN AND D. ETZION
underlying burnout. Role stress has been shown to increaseemotionalexhaustion(Lee and
Ashforth, 1993).Acknowledging exhaustion as the aspect most relevant to respite effect,
we have adopted Pines and Aronson’s (1981)definitionof burnout, with its focus on emo-
tional, mental, and physical exhaustion.
Whereas former respite research focused on the impact of respite on job stress and
psychological strainssuch as anxiety (Eden, 1990),burnout (Etzion et al., 1998;Etzion and
Sapir, 1997;Westman and Eden, 1997;Westman and Etzion, in press), and job and life sat-
isfaction (Lounsbury and Hoopes, 1986), the current study also examined a behavioral
strain -absenteeism.
Situationsin which thejob’s demandsexceed the individual’sresources are expected to
produce stress. In such situationswithdrawal representsa means of avoidingstress. For the
organization,one of the most significant forms of withdrawal is absenteeism, an observable
consequence of changing the allocation of time and effort from work to some nonwork
activity and setting (Fichman, 1998).
There are two main possible elements of absenteeism: duration and frequency. In the
current study we relate only to frequency of absence since frequencies were found to be a
more reliable measure than duration (see Melamed et al., 1995). However, we used two
measures, differentiating between reasons for absence: (a) absence for health reasons,
which includescertified sick absenceof more than three days; and (b) leave taken for “other
reasons” for at least one day. Both kinds of absenteeism may result from stress. Hendrix
(1985)found that the onsetof cold and flu was afunction of psychologicalstress,job-related
tension, anxiety and poor eating and health habits.
Most withdrawal research treats absence and lateness as different manifestations of
withdrawal from the aversive work environment. People who are having a hard time
coping with stress in theirjobs are more likely to call in sick or take a day off. Accordingto
Dilts et al. (1985), the phenomenon of absenteeismfrom the workplace is an expression of
employees’ withdrawal behavior, and can be seen as a measure of some form of organiza-
tional dysfunction. Similarly, Dwyer and Ganster (1991) note that work stress is linked to
results of withdrawal behavior - that is, various stress factors cause the employeesto want
to absent themselvesfrom the workplace.
Some researchers regard absenteeism from work as a conscious and considered deci-
sional act on the part of employees who are interested in not arriving at work because they
have other desires, personal matters, constraints, need for a break, or family obligations.A
number of researchers have suggested that absenteeism may provide a “safety valve” for
coping with stress. Neubauer (1992) found that nurses with high absenteeism rates rated
their work environment as high in stress and low in control. Similarly, Greiner et al.
(1998) used observationaljob analysis to measure stressor dimensions that interfere with
task performance among 308 transit operators. Results indicate that individuals in the high
stressor group were almost four times more likely to be in the high absenteeism group in
comparison with individualsin the low stressor group. In the same vein, Rentsch and Steel
(1998), studying civilian personnel working in a research and technology directorate,
found thatjob characteristics were durable predictors of absence over a 6-year period.
Dalton and Mesch (1992) found that those who requested but did not receive transfers
had higher post-decision absenteeismrates than those whose requests were granted. Simi-
larly, those who requested but did not receive promotion had higher absenteeismrates than
their counterpartswho were promoted (Schwarzwaldet af.,1992).In the same vein, Klaas
et al. (1991) showed that absenteeismwent up for two months after union employees filed
policy-relatedgrievances, which signaled and challenged a presumed injustice with regard

4. VACATION AND ABSENTEEISM 597
to treatment by management. Geurts er al. (1994) claim that explanations based on either
stress and withdrawal or equity would account for these types of input reductions
These findings indicate that absenteeism may be used as a mechanism for coping that
allows the employee to reduce stress and “recharge his batteries”. Thus, absenteeism may
also be seen in a positive light. Occasionally, withdrawal behavior of this type allows
employeesto escape from high-stressjobs or from boredom so that they can return to work
after a few days of rest with renewed strength (Kohler and Mathieu, 1993). Sheffer and
Bar-Netz (1982) add that the employees may consider absenteeismas a deserved right; to
be used as a form of protection or as a protest against such aspects of work life as poor
working conditionsor poor interpersonalrelations.
According to Israeli law, employers have to provide their employees with a certain
amount of time off with pay. In Israel as in the United States and other countries a major
type of paid time off is paid vacation.An organizationalvacation,which affords employees
the opportunity of distancing themselves from the job’s stressors, ought to bring relief, at
least temporarily, from chronic job stress and, consequently, from psychological and
behavioral strain.Therefore,the purpose of the present study was to test the hypothesis that
vacation relief decreases psychological and behavioral strains such as burnout and absent-
eeism (especiallyfor reasons other than health problems)which are caused by job stressors.
METHOD
Sample
Respondents, 87 employees in a food company, completed stress and burnout items on
three occasions. Promising confidentiality, we provided them with numbered question-
naires on the first occasion and asked them to write the same number on the following
questionnaires so we could concatenate each person’s data on all occasions. All Hebrew-
speakingemployeeswere approach (250). Theresponse rate on the first occasion was 50%
(126 out of 250) and on the second and third occasions69% (87out of 126).Thus, the final
samplefor analysisconsistedof 87 employees (53 males and 34 females). The average age
of the respondents was 41 (women 43 and men 38 years old), most of them were married
(72%) and 62% of them were Israeli-born. Over 64% had full high school education or
higher, with 27% of them holding an academic degree. The average seniority in the organ-
ization in this sample was 13years (men 16,women 12).
Design and Procedure
Vacation research offers a way of testing the stressor-strain hypothesis by comparing
levels of stress and strain while individuals are alternately on and off their jobs. Data
gatheredthis way can be analyzedas a “partiallyinterruptedtime series” (Eden, 1982, 1990),
a statistically powerful quasi-experimental design that rules out the major threats to
internal validity posed by measuring both stressors and strain only once, using questionn-
airescompleted by the same individuals.
We conducted repeated observations using Cook and Campbell’s (1979) interrupted
time-seriesdesign with replications.Without a control group, the threat to internal validity
is minimized by the repeated measurement of burnout and absenteeism before and after
vacation, in the presence and absence of job stress. We scheduled data collection around a

5. 598 M. WESTMAN AND D. ETZION
10-dayPassover vacation shutdown.Finding no precedent for ideal timing, we decided to
measure perceived job stress and burnout on three occasions: 10days before the vacation
(in order to avoid the last minute rush), three days after the vacation (in order to detect the
respite effect as close to the vacation as possible) and four weeks after the vacation. The
scheduling of the second post-vacation measurement followed previous respite studies
which showed fade-out around three to four weeks after returning from vacation (Etzion
and Sapir, 1997;Westman and Eden, 1997).
On all the occasions the questionnaires were distributed at work and collected on the
same day or a day or two later. The information regarding absenteeismwas collectedfrom
the organization’sdatabase.Permissionto accessthis information was requestedand granted
by the organization’shuman resource manager. Data on the absence of all the employees
who had records available during the research period (203) were gathered. We calculated
the percentagesof all those absentduring the relevant period, once before the vacation and
twice after the vacation. The dates of measurement were determined by organizational
routine, using the regular monthly reports generated by the personnel department on work
attendance. The pre-vacation measure of absenteeism included all incidence of absences
accumulated during the month prior to the vacation (March). As the first post-vacation
measure was generated for the month that included the two-weekvacation (April),it related
to absences accumulated for only two working weeks (16 days) after returning from vaca-
tion. The second post-vacation measure was again an accumulation of the incidence of
absence during a full month (May) after the second measurement -that is, six weeks after
returning from vacation.
Measures
Job stress was measured by 21 itemsfrom ajob characteristicquestionnaire(Etzion, 1984;
Pines et al., 1981) corresponding to Kahn et al.’s (1964) and Hackman and Oldham’s
(1975)conceptualization.Respondentsnoted on a 7-point scalethe prevalence in theirjobs
of such stressors as difficult decisions, taxing duties, deadlines, and conflicting demands.
Cronbach ason the three occasionsranged between .73and .79.
Burnout was measured using the 21-item Burnout Index (BM) devised by Pines and
Kafry (Pines et al., 1981). The BM measures on a 7-point scale how often respondents
experience physical exhaustion (e.g., weak, tired), emotional exhaustion (e.g., depressed,
entrapped),and mental exhaustion(e.g., worthless, rejected).We omitted one item (rundown)
due to the high proportion of missing data caused by a typo that made this item difficult to
comprehend.For the 20 items, a ranged between .87 and .92 on the three occasions.Factor
analysis of the BM revealed only one dimension.
Absenteeism. Data concerning frequency of absence for the whole group’ were gathered
from computerized attendance records provided by the human resource manager. We
counted as absentee for “other reasons” any employee who was absent from work for at
least one working day during the relevant period and we counted as “sick” any employee
who called in sick for three consecutive days upon a doctor’s order. Since the number of
‘Sincethe data to which we had access was anonymous, we were able to calculate the absenteeism rate on a
groupbasis from all available recordsof employeeswho went on vacation, including those who did not complete
our stress and burnout questionnaires.Thus, there is no direct correspondencebetween the n’s of the self-report
data(87) andthe organizational hard data (203).

6. VACATION AND ABSENTEEISM 599
Table 1
3 occasions (N= 87)"
Means, standard deviation and intercorrelations among stress and burnout measures across
Measures M SD I 2 3 4 5
1. Stress1 3.73 .69
2. Stress2 3.51 .61 .50***
3. Stress3 3.63 .61 .70*** .49***
4. Burnout1 2.89 .65 .54*** .44** .42***
5. Burnout2 2.70 .99 .I3 .55*** . I 1 .56***
6. Burnout3 2.92 .94 .35* .2Ia .41*** .55*** .32***
Nores: 51's range from 77to 82 due to missingdata;' p < .I0*p < .05;**p < .01; ***I>< . 0 1 .
working days in each of the three periods was not the same, we compared the percentages
of absenteeism only between two similar periods, namely, the pre-vacation period (the full
month of March) and the second post-vacation period (the full month of May). We used the
month that included the vacation (April), consisting actually of only 16working days after
the vacation, just to look for trends, not as a basis for comparison.
RESULTS
Table 1 presents means, standard deviations and intercorrelations between stress and burn-
out on all three occasions. The three correlations in the upper left-hand triangle are test-retest
reliability coefficients of the job stressors measure; median = .56. The three correlations in
the lower right-hand triangle are test-retest reliability coefficients of the burnout measure
(median =.48). Job stressors and burnout were strongly correlated on all three occasions
(median of the three simultaneous stress-burnout correlations (italicized in Table 1)
r= SO), lending support to the hypothesis thatjob stress is related to burnout.
VacationEffects
ANOVA of job stress and burnout (see Tables 1 and 2) across the three occasions yielded
an overall occasions effect which indicated that mean stress and mean burnout changed
significantly across the three occasions (F(2,170)=5.08 and 6.23, respectively; p c .01).
Table 2 Anova ofjob stressacross three occasions
Source df ss MS F
Occasions 2 2.06 1.03 5.08**
Residual 172 34.93 0.20
Note: **p < .Ol.
Table 3 Anova of burnout acrossthree occasions
Source df ss MS F
~~ ~~
Occasions 2 3.27 1.64 6.23**
Residual I68 44.13 0.26
Nore: **p < .01

7. 600
3.80 --
3.70
l
n 3.60
v)
l
n
a
0 3.50
7
2
+
3.40
M. WESTMAN AND D. ETZION
z
-_
--
--
- *
/
//
Pre-vacation Post-vacation1 Post-vacation 2
(3.73) (3.51) (3.63)
Figure 1 Meanjob stress across three occasions.
Pre-vacation Post-vacation 1 Post-vacation 2
(2.89) (2.70) (2.92)
Figure 2 Mean burnout acrossthree occasions.
Figures 1 and 2 show mean perceived job stress and mean burnout, respectively, on the
three occasions.Thepattern of fallingand rising levelsofjob stressand burnout clearlyshows
the hypothesized ameliorativeimpactof vacation on both perceivedjob stress and burnout.
Vacation had a distinct and amelioratingeffect on the perception of job stress and on the
experienceof burnout, immediately after vacation, followed by a return to the pre-vacation

8. VACATION AND ABSENTEEISM
70
60
so
40
.
I
B
8 30
*
8
4
4 20
lo --
601
--
--
--
--
--
--
Table4 Cochran test comparingpercentageof absenteeism across two occasions
Source df Cochran Q N
Occasions* 1 0.78 175
Occasionsh 1 19.75** 174
Notes: ‘Absenteeism for health reasons;bAbsenteeismforotherreasons;**I,c .01
level after four weeks. Comparison between pre-vacation job stress and the first post-
vacation measure (post-vacation 1) showed a clear respite effect (F(1,85)= 10.30,p < .01).
Comparing the two post-vacation measures of stress (post-vacation 1 and post-vacation 2)
showed a slight non-significant rise in job stress a month after the vacation (F(1,85)
=2.25, ns). However, comparing the pre-vacation level of job stress to the second post-
vacation level (post-vacation 2) revealed a non-significant difference as well (F(1,85)
=2.90, ns), indicatingthat by four weeks after the vacation there was no longer any signi-
ficant evidence of relief from stress. As for burnout, comparison between pre-vacation
burnout and the first post-vacation measure showed a clear respite effect (F(1,85) = 11.OO,
p <.01).Comparingthe two post-vacation measures of burnout showed a significantrise in
burnout a month after the vacation, evidencing fade-out of the relief that had been experi-
enced duringthe vacation (F(1,85) =7.58,p <.05).Indeed,comparingthe pre-vacationlevel
of burnout to the second post-vacation level (post-vacation 2), revealed a non-significant
difference (F(1,85) =0.31,p >.05),indicating that by four weeks after the vacation burn-
out had returned to its chronic pre-vacation level. To summarize,job stress and burnout
dropped to their lowest level immediately after the vacation and returned to their chronic,
pre-vacation level by four weeks after the vacation, the beneficial effects of the vacation
having vanished.
----- otherreasons
health reasons
0
Pre-vacation Post-vacation
Figure 3 Rates of absenteeism for health reasonsand forotherreasons across two occasions.

9. 602 M. WESTMAN AND D. ETZION
As for absenteeism,we compared percentagesof absencesfor the total group before and
after the vacation using the Cochran Q-test (see Table 4 and Figure 3). The rate of absent-
eeism for health reasons was 34% in the pre-vacation period, 18%in the first post-vacation
period, and 31% in the second post-vacation period (see Figure 3). Our findings show that
for the absenteeismrate for health reasons there was no significantdifference between the
pre-vacation and second post-vacation period (Q=0.78; ns).
The rate of absenteeismfor “other reasons” was 63%in the pre-vacationperiod, 32%in
the first post-vacation period, and 44% in the second post-vacation period. The findings
regardingabsenteeismfor “otherreasons” show that the absenteeismrate six weeks after the
vacationwas stillsignificantlylowerthan duringthepre-vacation period (Q= 19.75;~
c .001).
DISCUSSION
The results confirm the hypothesis that vacation relief decreases psychological and beha-
vioral strains caused by job stress. The timing of the measurement occasions around the
vacation respite strengthensthe causal interpretation of these relationships and patterns of
change when compared to the one-shot correlations most often invoked to test the stress-
strain hypothesis.
The vacation alleviated perceived job stress and thus also the experience of burnout as
predicted, replicatingfindings that a respite from work has the effect of lessening strain to
levels that are lower than chronic, on-the-job levels (Eden, 1990; Etzion et al., 1998;
Frankenhaeuseret al., 1989;Westman and Eden, 1997).in a sampleof blue-collar workers.
However, the most notable contribution of this study is the finding of a respite effect on a
behavioral strain, absenteeism,measured objectively.
The finding that absenteeism for non-health reasons decreased after vacation supports
Westman’s(1999) view that respiteresearch should be embedded in COR theory (Hobfoll,
1989).When employees loseresourcesunder chronic stress, one of the possibilities to stop
the loss cycle and start a gain cycle is to distance themselves from the cause of loss, taking
time off, being absent from work. It also ties in with the notion of Staw and Oldham (1978)
and Beiting (1984)that continuingabsenteeismmay simultaneouslyreflectongoingattempts
to obtain relief from a negative work situation. Our findings indicatethat taking a vacation
can be regarded as a stress management technique. As such, our findingscorroborate find-
ings concerning the beneficial effects of stress management intervention on burnout and
absenteeism. To illustrate, Cooper and Golanz (1991), who assessed the impact of stress
counseling, found a decline from pre- to post-test in absence days, sickness events, and
depression.No suchchangeswere found for the controlgroup.Similarly,Dierendonck et al.
(1998), who conducted a burnout intervention program assessed individual absenteeism
rates before and after the program. They found that burnout and absenteeismdiminished in
the experimentalgroupas compared with a controlgroup. Stressrelief may therefore be the
underlying mechanism of absenteeism. From the point of the employee, absenteeism is a
self-initiatedrespite designedto rebuild resources.
From a practical viewpoint, absenteeism represents a significantcost and source of dis-
ruption to the organization(Rhodesand Steers, 1990).To decreaseabsenteeism,the organ-
ization should try to regulate vacations according to stressfulperiods. However, it is always
preferable to use stress prevention measures such as decreasing overload, ambiguity and
contlict and decreasingthe organizationaljob stress.Preventivestress management is more
effective for the individual and the organization than stress management.

10. VACATION AND ABSENTEEISM 603
Measuringjob stress and burnout three times enabled us to discover that vacation has an
abrupt, positive impact that fades gradually. Had we measured post-vacation stress and
burnout only once, immediatelyafter the vacation, we would have concluded that a vacation
attenuatesjob stress and burnout. Had we measured post-vacationjob stress and burnout
and absenteeismonly once, a month after vacation, we would have concluded that vacation
had no impact. Having two post-vacation measurements enabled us to detect a process
whereby the beneficial impact of vacation on job stress and burnout abates within two
weeks after vacation and fades almost entirely within six weeks.
Absenteeism due to “other”reasons, however, remained lower than before vacation even
six weeks after returning from vacation. If, as may be assumed, “other” refers to chores that
people need to accomplish during working hours (at banks, governmental offices, or
schools,for example), this may indicatethat not only short vacations, but also flexibility in
time or permission to take time off for essential errands, may reduce this kind of absentee-
ism (see, for example, Ronen, 1981). This idea is corroborated by Fichman (1989), who
found that the daily probability of absenteeismwent down as other opportunities to engage
in non-work activities, such as a paid holiday, occurred.
It is important to note that absenteeism was measured objectively. Many empirical and
survey-basedattendance studies have relied on self-reported absence (Harrison and Shaffer,
1994;Johns, 1994b).As there is, unfortunately, little research on the construct validity of
self-reports of absence, the validity of research that relies upon such reports is open to
question.
Absenteeism is harmful to the organizationnot only because of the working days lost,but
also because it may be followed by other withdrawal behaviors that distance the employee
from the organization.Indeed, some empirical literature claims that there is a progression
of withdrawal behaviors, implyingthat withdrawal behaviors occur in a specific order over
time (Mitra et al., 1992;Rosse, 1988).For example, Rosse (1988)found evidence of a pro-
gression of lateness to absence and from multiple absences to quitting. Thus, apart for the
immediate harm absenteeismcauses the organization,it can cause further harm and lead to
withdrawal if its sources are not effectively remedied.
Similarly, burnout takes a high toll in terms of employees’ physical and psychological
health, but its course of development and its warning signs are not always easily detected
by either managers or colleagues or even the affected individuals themselves (see Etzion,
1986, 1987).By the time anybody in the employee’s surroundingsrealizes that the person is
burningout it may be too lateto prevent the health hazards. A high incidenceof absenteeism,
however, may serve as a warning sign for intervention and taking preventive measures,
such as vacation or any other sort of break from work.
Much more research is needed on absence and nonwork activities. We need to identify
the activities for which people are leaving the workplace and the functions and attractions
of these activities.There is little concrete knowledgeand informationas to what people do
with their time away from work. We suggest that further research in the area of respite
should focus on this issue as an obvious next step.
As burnout and absenteeism are costly to the organization, vacations can be used as a
means to prevent strain and not only as a stress management intervention. According to
COR theory, interrupting loss spirals and creating gain spirals is the best course for stress
resistance because it is preventive. This can best be achieved by planning short respites.
Most respite research,however, has focusedon the impact of long vacationson well-being.
We lack adequateknowledgeof optimalrespite length and timing to plan a respite that will
help employees derive maximum relief. Nevertheless,there are indications that even a day

11. 604 M. WESTMAN AND D. ETZION
or two off can have an ameliorative effects (Halberg et al., 1965; Frankenhaeuser et al.,
1989).Pines and Aronson (1988) suggestedthat time off can be a long weekend, a week, a
couple weeks, or even more. Eliot (1982)recommended frequent short vacations as a form
of stress management. According to Quick and Quick (1984), five well-planned 3-day
weekends may be better than a one-week vacation. Etzion and Sapir (1997) found that the
optimalvacation length for decreasingstress and burnout was 10days.We need research to
pinpoint the ideal length and frequency of vacations for maximal relief. The impact of
short, daily respites should also be studied, as they might be efficient on-the-job tools for
combating strain and serve as additional ways to facilitate resource replenishment,as well
as acting as a preventive measure for decreasingburnout and absenteeism.
Occupational health psychology is “concerned with taking the distress out of work”
(Quick et al., 1997,p. 3) through prevention and intervention.Thus, our ultimate aim is to
help create healthy productive workplaces that do not harm workers or their families.
Meaningful prevention and intervention strategiesmust rest on sound theory and evidence.
Vacationhespite research thus has an important contribution to make to occupational
health psychology. In accomplishing this agenda, research on the vacation-stress-strain
framework faces several significant challenges. To develop prevention and intervention
strategies, we need to focus our efforts on identifying work organization factors that have
an impacton the employee’swell-being,beyond the effects of wages and benefits.Another
avenue of research is identifying the characteristics of respite that alleviate stress and
strain.
There are a few possible limitationsthat have to be mentioned. First of all, the vacation
was the shutdown Passover holiday which might be different from a vacation in another
period of the year. We have no information about what people did during this vacation.
However, we do know that vacation time is different from work time. There is a detach-
ment from the workplace and a change of venue. As most shutdown vacations are around
holidays it is nearly impossible to control this possible confounding factor. However, past
studies have shown that the holiday did not have the impact of a vacation.Etzion and Ofek
(I 998) who compared the effects of a Passover shutdown holiday in a sample of observant
and non-observantwomen social workers, found a significantdecreasein burnout after the
Passover vacation in both groups. This finding is not different from other respite findings
in which the break from work was due to a holiday (Etzion and Ofek, 1998), a stint of
active reserve duty (Etzion et al., 1998) or a business trip (Westman and Etzion, in press).
The holiday shutdown type of vacation may cause a problem of generalizability to other
kinds of respite. However, as our findings replicate those of other studies using various
kinds of vacation,they add to the generalizabilityof the phenomenon.
A second limitation of this study was the small sample size, though the three repeated
measurements compensate for this problem. A third limitation stems from the need to
preserve the participants’ anonymity, which is the reason we were unable to obtain the
individuals’ absence data and could not investigatethe direct relationship of stress, burn-
out, and absenteeism.However, as a guard against a biased and socially desirablereaction,
keepingthe promise of confidentialityis essentialfor generatingvalid and reliable responses
from participants.
Acknowledgements
This research was partly supported by the Israel Institute of Business Research, Tel Aviv
University,Israel.

12. VACATION AND ABSENTEEISM 605
References
Beiting, M.W. (1984) Relationship among absences, performance, and attendance for satisfied and dissatisfied
Cook, D. and Campbell, D.T. (1979) Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings.
Cooper, C.L. and Golanz, S. (1991) The impact of stress counseling at work. Journal o
f Social Behavior and
Dalton, D.R. and Mesch, D. (1992)The impact of employee-initiated transfer on absenteeism: A four-year cohort
Dierendonck, D.V., Schaufeli, W.B. and Buunk, B.P. (1998) The evaluation of individual burnout intervention
Dilts, D.A., Deitsch, C.R. and Paul, R.J. (1985) Getting absent workers back on thejob: An analytical approach.
Dwyer, D.J. and Ganster, D.C. (1991)The effectsof job demands and control on employeeattendance and satis-
Eden, D. (1982) Critical job events, acute stress, and strain: A multiple interrupted time series. Organizational
Eden, D. (1990) Acute and chronic job stress, strain, and vacation relief. Organizational Behavior and Human
Eliot, R.S. (1982) Stressreduction: Techniques that can help you and your patients. Consultant,91-1 12.
Etzion, D. (1984) Moderating effect of social support on the stress-burnout relationship. Journal of Applied
Psychology,69,615-622.
Etzion, D. (1986,July) Burnout: The hidden agenda o
fhuman distress. Paper presented at the AIPAAAAP,XXIst
International Congress of Applied Psychology, Jerusalem, Israel.
Etzion, D. (1987, March) A new look af burnout: Coping with hidden stresses. Paper presented at the XXIst
Scientific Convention of the Israel Psychological Association, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Etzion, D., Eden, D. and Lapidot, Y. (1998) Relief from job stressors and burnout: Reserve service as a respite.
Journal o
f Applied Psychology,83,377-585.
Etzion, D. and Ofek, E. (1998, June) The influencefrom vacation to work - organized vacation and personal
vacation on stress and burnout. Paper accepted for presentation at the Conference on Social Stress, Budapest,
Hungary.
Etzion, D. and Sapir, 0.(1997, April) Annual vacation: Duration and relieffrom job stress and burnout. Paper
presented at the 12th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology,
St. Louis.
Fichman, M. (1989) Attendance makes the heart grow fonder: A hazard rate approach to modeling attendance.
Journal ofApplied Psychology,74,325-335.
Fichman, M. (1998) Motivational consequences of absence and attendance: Proportional hazard estimation of
a dynamic motivational model. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 73, 119-134.
Frankenhaeuser, M., Lundberg, U.,Fredrikson, M., Melin, B., Tuomisto, M., Myrstern, A,, Hedman, M., Berg-
man-Losman, B. and Willin, L. (1989) Stress on and off the job as related to sex and occupational status in
white-collar workers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10,321-346.
Freudenberger, H.J. (1980) Burnout: The high cost of high achievement. Garden City, New York: Anchor
Press.
Geurts, S.A., Schaufeli, W.B. and Rutte,C.G. (1999)Absenteeism, turnover intention and inequity inthe employ-
ment relationship. Workand Stress, 13,253-267.
Greiner, B.A., Krause, N., Ragland, D.R. and Fisher, J.M. (1998) Objective stress factors, accidents, and absent-
eeism in transit operators: A theoretical framework and empirical evidence. Journal o
f Occupational Health
Psychology, 3, 13Cb146.
Hackman, J.R. and Oldham (1975) Development of a job diagnostic survey.Journal o
f Applied Psychology, 60,
Halberg, F., Engeli, M. and Hamburger, C. (1965)The 17 ketosteroid excretion of healthy men on weekdays and
Harrison, D.A. and Shaffer, M.A. (1994) Comparative examinations of self-reports and perceived absenteeism
Hendrix, W.H. (1985)Factors predictive of stress, organizational effectiveness, and coronary heart disease poten-
Hobfoll, S.E. (1989)Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress.American Psychologist,
Jex, S.M. and Beebr, T.H. (1991) Emerging theoretical and methodological issues in the study of work-related
Johns, G. (1994b) How often were you absent? A review of the use of self-reported absence data. Journal o
f
employees. Dissertation Abstract International, 44,39678.
Chicago: Rand McNally.
Personality,6,411-423.
assessment. Human Relations,45,291-304.
program: The role of inequity and social support.Journal of Applied Psychology, 83,392-407.
New York: Quorum Books.
faction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12,595608.
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 30,312-329.
Decision Processes, 45,175-193.
159-170.
weekends. Experimental Medicine and Surgery, 23.61-64.
norms: Wading through Lake Wobegon. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 79,24&25 1.
tial. Aviation, Space & Environmental Medicine,56,654459.
44,5 13-524.
stress. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Managernent,9,311-365.
Applied Psychology, 79,574-59 1.

13. 606 M. WSTMAN AND D. ETZION
Kahn, R.L., Wolfe, D.M., Quinn, R.P., Snoek, J.D. and Rosenthal, R.A. (1964) Organizational stress: Studies in
Klass, B.S., Heneman, H.G. and Olson, C.A. (1991) Effects of grievance activity on absenteeism. Journal o
f
Kohler, S. and Mathieu, J. (1993) Individual characteristics, work perceptions, and affective reaction influences
Lee, R.T. and Ashforth, B.E. (1993) A further examination of managerial burnout: Toward an integrated model.
Lee, R.T. and Ashforth, B.E. (1996) A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the three dimensions of
Lounsbury, J.W. and Hoopes, L.L. (1986) A vacation from work: Changes in work and nonwork outcomes.
Maslach, C. (1982)Burnout: The cost ofcaring. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Melamed, S., Ben-Avi. I.. Luz, J. and Green, M. (1995) Objective and subjective work monotony: Effects onjob
satisfaction, psychological distress, and absenteeism in blue-collar workers. Journal of Applied Psychology.
80.2942.
Mitra. A., Jenkins, G.D. and Gupta, N. (1992) A meta-analytic review of the relationship between absence and
turnover. Journal o
fApplied Psychology,77,879-889.
Neuhauer, P.J. (1992) The impact of stress, hardiness, home and work environment on job satisfaction, illness,
and absenteeism in critical care nurses. Medical Psychotherapy: An International Journal, 5, 109-122.
Pines, A. and Aronson, E. (1988) Career burnout: Causes and cures (2nd ed.). New York: The Free Press.
Pines, A,, Aronson, E. and Kafry, D. (1981) Burnout: From tedium to personal growth. New York: The Free
Quick, J.C., Camara, W.J., Hurrel. J.J. Jr., Johnson, J.V., Piotrkowski, C.S., Sauter, S.L. and Spielberger, C.D.
Quick, J.C. and Quick, J.D. (1984) Organizational stress andpreventive management. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rentsch, J.R. and Steel, R.P. (1998) Testing the durability of job characteristics as predictors of absenteeism over
Rhodes, S.T.and Steers, R.M. (1990) Managing employee absenteeism.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Ronen, S.(1981) Flexible working hours. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rosse,J.G. (1988)Relations among lateness, absence, and turnover: Is there a progression of withdrawal? Huntun
Schwarzwald, J., Koslowsky, M. and Shalit, B. (1992) A field study of employees’ attitudes and behavior after
Sheffer, A. and Bar-Netz, M. (1982)Absencefrom workfor medical reasons. Tel Aviv Israel Industry Survey (in
Shirorn, A. (1989) Burnout in work organizations. In: C.L. Cooper and I. Robertson (Eds.), InrernutionalReview
Staw, B.M. and Oldham, G.R. (1978) Reconsidering our dependent variables: A critic and empirical study.Acad-
Westman, M. (1999, August) Gain and loss spirals: Applying Hobfoll’s COR theory to respite reseurch. Paper
Westman, M. and Eden, D. (1997) Effects of respite from work on burnout: Vacation relief and fade-out. Journul
Westman, M. and Etzion, D. (in press) The effects of overseas business trips onjob stress and burnout. Applied
role conflict and ambiguiry. New York: Wiley.
Applied Psychology,76,818-824.
on differentiated absence criteria. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 14.515-530.
Journal o
f Organizational Behavior, 14,3-20.
burnout. Journal ofApplied Psychology,81, 123-133.
Journal of Applied Psychology,71,392-401.
Press.
(1997)Introduction and historical overview. Journal o
f Occupational Psychology,2 . 3 4 .
a six-year period. Personnel Psychology, 51, 165-190.
Relations, 41,517-531.
promotion decisions. Journal ofApplied Psychology,77,s11-5 14.
Hebrew).
of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp.26-48). New York Wiley.
emy of Management Journal, 21,539-559.
presented at the Academy of Management Meeting, Chicago.
o
f Applied Psychology,82,51G527.
Psychology:An International Review.