ARTICLE IN PRESS

0278-4319/$ - se

doi:10.1016/j.ijh

�CorrespondE-mail addr

International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 151–161

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhosman

Hotel service providers’ emotional labor: The antecedents andeffects on burnout

Hyun Jeong Kim�

School of Hospitality Business Management, 471 Todd Hall, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USA

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the antecedents and consequences of two emotional labor strategies (surface and deep acting)

in the lodging industry. Variety, duration, and positive display rules are significant predictors of hotel service providers’ deep acting and

negative display rules are related to service providers’ surface acting. Employees ohigh in neuroticism are more likely to fake their

emotional expressions (surface acting) when dealing with guests and those high in extraversion are more likely to try hard to invoke the

appropriate emotions (deep acting). Results further indicate that surface actors are more exhausted and cynical than deep actors and the

mediating role of emotional labor between burnout and job and personality characteristics is found to be rather weak. Managerial

implications for hotel operators are discussed.

r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Surface acting; Deep acting; Emotional labor; Job characteristics; Personality; Burnout

1. Introduction

It is a common knowledge that hospitality front-lineemployees frequently encounter demanding and difficultcustomers. Although it is not a pleasant experience,hospitality service agents are often required to be politeand smile in front of the customers. Emotional labor takesplace in this kind of service work situation. Emotionallabor is the performance of various forms of emotion workin the context of paid employment (Hochschild, 1983).Pugh (2001) demonstrated the display of positive emotionby employees is related to customers’ positive affect afterservice transactions and evaluations of perceived servicequality. Ashkanasy et al. (2002) asserted that positiveemotional expression by service agents can have afavorable effect on customer retention, recovery, andsatisfaction. Despite its benefit to a company’s bottomline, emotional labor can be detrimental to serviceproviders both psychologically and physically. A growingbody of work shows emotion work or emotional labor as

e front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

m.2007.07.019

ing author. Tel.: +1509 335 4706; fax: +1 509 335 3857.

ess: Jennykim@wsu.edu

one of the major causes of occupational stress and burnout(Brotheridge and Grandey, 2002; Grandey, 2003; Krumland Geddes, 1997, 2000; Morris and Feldman, 1997;Pugliesi, 1999; Sharrad, 1992; Tolich, 1993; Wharton, 1993;Zapf et al., 2001).Because emotional labor is a relatively new concept,

there is a dearth of research on this subject in thehospitality academic field. In addition, most studiespublished in hospitality and tourism journals rely onqualitative methods. For example, Seymour (2000) inter-viewed workers in traditional silver service restaurants andfast food restaurants to compare the kind and degree ofemotional labor in two different foodservice outlets.Likewise, after conducting a personal interview with staffmembers working for the pubs in the UK, Sandiford andSeymour (2002) demonstrated some evidence of emotionallabor causing job stress. The authors further foundemotions generated at work could carry on outside ofwork and influence workers’ private lives.Therefore, this study is designed to examine the

antecedents and outcomes of emotional labor, using asurvey (quantitative) method, in the context of the lodgingindustry. The antecedents of emotional labor are divided

ARTICLE IN PRESSH.J. Kim / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 151–161152

into job characteristics and individual attributes and theconsequences of emotional labor focus on job burnout.Specifically, the following three research questions areanswered in this study: (1) which job characteristicsand individual attributes predict hotel service providers’emotional labor? (2) how is emotional labor relatedto hotel service employees’ burnout? and (3) ultimatelydoes emotional labor play a role as a mediator bet-ween burnout and individual characteristics and jobattributes?

2. Literature review

2.1. The origin of emotional labor

The concept of emotional labor originates from Hochs-child (1979, 1983). According to her, common expectationsexist regarding the appropriate emotional reactions ofindividuals during service transactions. For example, flightattendants are supposed to feel cheerful and friendly,whereas funeral directors are supposed to feel somber andreserved (Ashforth and Humphrey, 1993). This phenom-enon is described as ‘‘feeling rules’’ (Hochshild, 1983) andothers refer to it as ‘‘display rules’’ (Ashforth andHumphrey, 1993; Morris and Feldman, 1996). Serviceproviders experience emotional dissonance when theemotions to be expressed differ from the emotions felt(Hochschild, 1983). Employees handle this dissonanceeither by surface acting or deep acting (Hochschild,1983). According to her, feelings are changed from the‘‘outside in’’ in surface acting (faking feelings), whereasfeelings are changed from the ‘‘inside out’’ in deep acting(modifying inner feelings). She recognizes the situationwhere workers spontaneously feel what they are required tofeel with no conscious effort. This case is called passivedeep acting.

Researchers debate if passive deep acting should beincluded in the conceptualization of emotional laborbecause passive deep acting lacks the process of internaldissonance and conscious effort (Mann, 1999a). In general,deep acting indicates active deep acting (involving indivi-duals’ internal dissonance and effort) rather than passivedeep acting.

2.2. Dimensions of emotional labor and its measures

As theories on emotional labor have progressed, severalresearchers attempted to develop a psychometricallyrigorous measure of emotional labor. Morris and Feldman(1996) conceptualized the emotional labor construct alongfour dimensions: frequency of interactions, attentivenessto display rules, variety of emotional expressions, andemotional dissonance. Later, in their empirical research onantecedents and consequences of emotional labor, emo-tional labor was identified into three sub-constructs:frequency, duration, and emotional dissonance (Morrisand Feldman, 1997).

Kruml and Geddes (2000) questioned content validity ofMorris and Feldman’s (1997) measure because their scalewas not fully linked with Hochchild’s (1983) actingparadigm. Kruml and Geddes’ (2000) scale included twofacets: emotive dissonance and emotive effort. The firstfactor captured Hochschild’s (1983) surface and passivedeep acting: the higher is the mean score, the more emotivedissonance (i.e., more surface acting); and the lower themean score, the less emotive dissonance (i.e., more passivedeep acting). The second factor reflected active deep acting.In an effort to integrate previous perspectives, Brother-

idge and Grandey (2002) restructured emotional labor intotwo categories: One focuses on the characteristic of the joband the other emphasizes employees’ emotion managementprocess. The former is called ‘‘job-focused emotionallabor’’ which includes the frequency, duration, variety,and intensity of emotional labor and display rules. Thelatter is named ‘‘employee-focused emotional labor’’, anemotion management technique that employees use in thecourse of interactions with customers. This categoryincludes surface acting and deep acting. Brotheridge andLee (2003) used the similar approach. They developed anemotional labor measure including both ‘‘job-focused’’ and‘‘employee-focused’’ variables. Specifically, their measurehas six facets: frequency of interaction, intensity andvariety of emotional display, duration of interaction, andsurface and deep acting.Emotional labor researchers often ignored spontaneous

and genuine emotions, acknowledged as passive deepacting by Hochschild (1983), in the development of theemotional labor measure. Diefendorff et al. (2005)constructed ‘‘the display of naturally felt emotions’’ as anindependent factor and formed a three-dimensional emo-tional labor instrument: surface acting, deep acting, andnaturally felt emotions.In summary, despite many different measures developed,

the general view is that job-related variables, such asfrequency, intensity, variety, and display rules are per-ceived as the antecedents of emotional labor rather thanemotional labor itself and two acting modes (surface anddeep acting) that employees use to match the requiredemotional display are regarded as the true components ofemotional labor (Grandey, 2000).

2.3. Antecedents of emotional labor

2.3.1. Job characteristics

Customer satisfaction depends on the quality of theinterpersonal interaction between the customer and front-line employees (Bitner, 1990; Bitner et al., 1994). Hochs-child (1983) argued that job characteristics such asnumerous interactions with customers are likely to increaseservice providers’ emotional labor. Brotheridge andGrandey (2002) found that frequency and variety ofemotional display were positively related to surface actingand deep acting and that duration was positively related todeep acting. In the article by Brotheridge and Lee (2003),

ARTICLE IN PRESSH.J. Kim / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 151–161 153

frequency and variety showed a positive relationship withsurface acting and deep acting, although duration was notrelated to either acting. Diefendorff et al. (2005) reportedinteraction characteristics (frequency, duration, and routi-neness) were not significant predictors of surface acting butmostly related to deep acting. Specifically, duration had apositive impact on deep acting and routineness showed anegative influence on deep acting.

The most prevalent theory regarding the relationshipbetween customer contact variables and emotional laborstrategies originates from Morris and Feldman’s (1996)conceptual work. The authors argued that the more often awork role requires socially proper emotional displays, thegreater the company’s demand for emotional regulationand the greater employees’ emotional labor; frequentchanges in the variety of emotions to fit in differentsituational contexts require more planning and anticipationon the part of service employees, thereby entailing greateremotional labor; and emotional displays of long durationrequire more effort than short duration, leading to greateremotional labor. This notion suggests the possibility offrequency, variety, and duration increasing emotionallabor in general (both surface and deep acting). However,previous findings especially regarding duration seem tosuggest that duration largely leads to deep acting. Deepacting may be the strategy of choice during long interactionbecause it becomes difficult for employees to fake emotionfor a long period of time (Diefendorff et al., 2005). Hence,the following three hypotheses are proposed regarding therelationships between the three interaction characteristics(frequency, duration, and variety) and emotional laborstrategies.

Hypothesis 1a. Frequency of emotional expression willhave a positive relationship with hotel service employees’surface acting and deep acting.

Hypothesis 1b. Variety of emotional expression will have apositive relationship with hotel service employees’ surfaceacting and deep acting.

Hypothesis 1c. Duration of interaction will have a positiverelationship with hotel service employees’ deep acting.

The hospitality literature has shown that job autonomycan alleviate the level of hospitality employees’ emotionalexhaustion Kim et al. (2007). Morris and Feldman (1996,1997) suggested employees who have less autonomy overtheir behavior should feel more emotive dissonance, whichlikely leads them to fake feelings (surface acting); and thosewho have more autonomy experience less emotive dis-sonance, therefore they are likely to express their naturalemotions. According to their rationale, job autonomy isnot related to emotive effort (i.e., deep acting). Abreast ofMorris and Feldman’s (1996, 1997) work, the followinghypothesis is predicted in the hotel work situation:

Hypothesis 1d. Job autonomy will have a negative relation-ship with hotel service providers’ surface acting.

According to Hochschild (1983), service occupationsinvolve strong norms and/or expectations regarding dis-plays of emotions. Research has shown that displayrules have a positive relationship with emotional acting(Brotheridge and Lee, 2002). Some studies separate displayrules into positive and negative rules. Positive display rulesevaluate service providers’ perceptions on expressingpositive emotions and negative display rules evaluate theperceptions regarding suppressing negative emotions atwork. Brotheridge and Grandey (2002) showed that bothtypes of display rules were positively correlated with bothtypes of acting. Diefendorff and Richard (2003) hypothe-sized that perceived demands (positive and negative displayrules) would be positively related to emotional display, butthe result indicated that only positive rule demands led toemotional display. Diefendorff et al. (2005) found thatpositive display rules were positively correlated with deepacting and negative display rules were positively correlatedwith surface acting. The authors explained that positiverules (what to express) clarify expectations better and resultin ‘‘good faith’’ attempts (deep acting), whereas negativerules (what not to express) lead employees to just go throughthe motion and fake their emotions (surface acting).In hospitality organizations such as hotel companies,

explicit norms are often included in the job description andemployees are trained accordingly (e.g., showing a smilewith a cheerful greeting). Theoretically, it seems plausiblethat hotel firms’ display rules increase the likelihood ofhotel personnel’s emotional regulation, leading to emo-tional acting either surface or deep acting. Therefore, inharmony with Brotheridge and Grandey’s (2002) work, it ispredicted that display rules, regardless of the type, willaffect both acting strategies.

Hypothesis 1e. Both display rules will have a positiveinfluence on both acting strategies in hotels.

2.3.2. Individual characteristics

Emotional labor researchers seem to agree that serviceworkers’ emotional acting can be explained by personalitytraits because personal dispositions underlie much of theway that people think and behave (Ashkanasy et al., 2002).The dispositional factors frequently mentioned in theirrelations to emotional labor are positive affectivity (PA)and negative affectivity (NA). NA is generally positivelyrelated to surface acting and PA demonstrates a negativeassociation with surface acting (Brotheridge and Grandey,2002; Brotheridge and Lee, 2003; Diefendorff et al., 2005).Affectivity variables are largely irrelevant to deep acting(Brotheridge and Grandey, 2002; Brotheridge and Lee,2003; Diefendorff et al., 2005) with one exception:Gosserand and Diefendorff (2005) reported the samepattern of relations between surface acting and PA(negative relation) and NA (positive relation) as others,but also reported a positive relation between deep actingand PA and NA. However, no rationale was provided bythe authors.

ARTICLE IN PRESSH.J. Kim / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 151–161154

Some scholars have operationalized PA with extraver-sion and NA with neuroticism because extraversion andneuroticism are strongly related to PA and NA, respec-tively (Diefendorff et al., 2005). Diefendorff and Richard(2003) argued that the advantage of using personalitytraits, instead of the direct measures of affectivity, is thatsince extraversion and neuroticism are linked to thedominant personality framework, researchers can makebroader inferences in connection with organizationalstudies using those traits. Hence, utilizing the personalitytraits of extraversion and neuroticism, we posited thefollowing two hypotheses with more focus on surfaceacting:

Hypothesis 2a. Neuroticism will have a positive influenceon hotel service providers’ surface acting.

Hypothesis 2b. Extraversion will have a negative influenceon hotel service providers’ surface acting.

2.4. Employees’ emotional labor as a mediator and its

impact on burnout

Job burnout is defined as ‘‘a syndrome of emotionalexhaustion, depersonalization of others, and a feeling ofreduced personal accomplishment’’ (Lee and Ashforth,1990, p. 743). The three constructs of burnout (emotionalexhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplish-ment) are renamed exhaustion, cynicism, and professionalefficacy, respectively, after development of Maslach Burn-out Inventory-General Survey (MBI-GS; Schaufeli et al.,1996). The MBI-GS, a modified version of the originalMBI, was designed to measure burnout in a broader rangeof occupations.

Research has shown the relationship between threefactors of burnout and acting modes. For example, surfaceacting was positively correlated with emotional exhaustionand depersonalization and negatively correlated withpersonal accomplishment (Brotheridge and Lee, 2003).Grandey (2003) also hypothesized a direct, positive pathfrom surface acting to emotional exhaustion and the resultwas supported. However, in Brotheridge and Grandey’s(2002) study, the effect of surface acting on emotionalexhaustion was too small to support the hypothesis; otherhypotheses regarding the influence of surface acting ondepersonalization (positive effect) and personal accom-plishment (negative effect) were supported as postulated.

Brotheridge and Lee (2002) explored the possibility ofthe existence of intervening variables between emotionallabor and burnout. They demonstrated surface acting hadan indirect influence on emotional exhaustion, depersona-lization, and personal accomplishment via either rewardingsocial relationships or authenticity or both variables. Insummary, overall surface acting brings unfavorable results:increase in emotional exhaustion, increase in depersonali-zation, and decrease in personal accomplishment. There-fore, the following three hypotheses are proposed for the

present research with the modified burnout terms in theMBI-GS:

Hypothesis 3a. Hotel service providers’ surface acting willhave a positive influence on exhaustion.

Hypothesis 3b. Hotel service providers’ surface acting willhave a positive influence on cynicism.

Hypothesis 3c. Hotel service providers’ surface acting willhave a negative influence on professional efficacy.

Regarding the deep acting strategy, the majority ofstudies show that deep acting produces more favorableoutcomes than surface acting. For instance, deep actinghad the positive correlation with a sense of personalaccomplishment among the three job burnout factors(Brotheridge and Lee, 2003). Similarly, Brotheridge andGrandey (2002) reported deep acting as a significant,positive predictor of personal accomplishment. However,the relationship between deep acting and emotionalexhaustion has been somewhat debatable. Grandey(2003) posited deep acting is positively related to emotionalexhaustion, but the result was not significant. In the pathmodel, Brotheridge and Lee (2002) showed deep actingaffected emotional exhaustion indirectly through theauthenticity variable, whereas deep acting had a direct,negative impact on depersonalization and a direct, positiveinfluence on personal accomplishment.Hochschild (1983) asserted that service providers who

identify too wholeheartedly with the job have a higher riskof burnout than those who distinguish themselves from thejob. Intuitively, it also makes sense that more energyand efforts are likely required to modify inner feelings(deep acting) than simply faking (surface acting). There-fore, in this study, it is proposed that deep acting willbe associated positively with hotel service employees’emotional exhaustion. The remaining hypotheses concern-ing the relationships with depersonalization and personalaccomplishment follow the previous results. The followingsummary shows the three research hypotheses of thepresent research about the deep acting strategy using themodified burnout terms in MBI-GS:

Hypothesis 4a. Hotel service providers’ deep acting willhave a positive influence on exhaustion

Hypothesis 4b. Hotel service providers’ deep acting willhave a negative influence on cynicism.

Hypothesis 4c. Hotel service providers’ deep acting willhave a positive influence on professional efficacy.

The hypotheses (1a–4c) predicted in this study implicitlysuggest that emotional labor mediates the effects of jobvariables and personality characteristics on burnout. InGrandey’s (2000) conceptual framework of emotionallabor, the following process is proposed: situational clues(e.g., interaction expectations, emotional events), individualvariables (e.g., gender, emotional intelligence, affectivity),and organizational factors (e.g., autonomy, supervisor

ARTICLE IN PRESSH.J. Kim / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 151–161 155

support) are input; employees soon experience an emo-tional regulation process (surface acting and deep acting);and emotional acting leads to individual and organiza-tional well-being (e.g., burnout and work performance).The basic framework of this study is in line with Grandey’s(2000) model with an implication of emotional acting asa mediator. Therefore, the following hypothesis is putforward in the hotel work setting:

Hypothesis 5. The two emotional labor strategies will actas a mediator between hotel service provider’s burnout andindividual and job-related variables.

3. Methodology

3.1. Data

A total of 197 hotel service employees participated in thepresent emotional labor study. These respondents partici-pated in the hotel job burnout research by Kim et al.(2007). The participants were a convenience sample,recruited through eight human resource managers whowere familiar with the School of Hospitality BusinessManagement at Washington State University (WSU).All the lodging properties were located in the state ofWashington, USA. Based on the size of the hotel, thenumber of questionnaires sent to each human resourcemanager varied from 50 to 220. The participantsmailed their questionnaire directly to the author. Theaverage return rate was 20%. The subjects consistedof 62% of female (119) and were, on average, about36 years old. The respondents came from almost everydepartment in the hotel including front office (39),restaurants (38), sales and marketing (25), housekeeping(23), catering (20), engineering (11), room service (7)and others (15). The subjects’ hotel work experiencevaried from two months to 35 years with a mean of sevenyears.

3.2. Questionnaire measures

3.2.1. Control variables

Gender, experience, and age were included as controlvariables. For example, emotional labor researchers arguethat females are more sensitive to the emotional cue ofothers and skillful at the practice of emotion management(Domagalski, 1999; Hochschild, 1983); inexperienced ornew workers experience more emotive dissonance or effortbecause of the company’s display rule that they begin tolearn (Hochschild, 1983, Kruml and Geddes, 2000); andolder employees are more able to control their emotionsand display appropriate emotions (Hochschild, 1983,Kruml and Geddes, 2000). The information on gender,experience, and age were included at the end of thequestionnaire. For experience, the total number of years ofthe subject’s hotel work experience including the currenthotel company was asked.

3.2.2. Personality characteristics

Personality characteristics were assessed with the sub-scales of neuroticism (10 items, a ¼ 0.84) and extraversion(10 items, a ¼ 0.89) of the Big Five in the InternationalPersonality Item Pool (IPIP; Goldberg, 2001). Bothneuroticism and extraversion items were rated on a5-point scale (1 ¼ very inaccurate, 5 ¼ very accurate).

3.2.3. Interaction characteristics

Three interaction characteristics (frequency, duration,and variety) were measured with items from Brotheridgeand Lee’s (2003) emotional labor scale with minor wordingchanges. For the frequency of interactions with customers(1 item), using a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 ¼ never, 5 ¼always), subjects were asked to rate ‘‘on an average day,how frequently’’ they make face-to-face or voice-to-voiceinteractions with hotel guests. Duration of emotion work(1 item) was measured by asking respondents an averagenumber of minutes required for a typical service transac-tion. Lastly, employees indicated the variety of emotionalexpressions they display at work (3 items, a ¼ 0.84; sampleitem: ‘‘I display many different emotions when interactingwith customers’’) on a 5-point response scale (1 ¼ never,5 ¼ always).

3.2.4. Autonomy

Autonomy indicates self-determination, that is, thesubject’s feeling of having control over his or her ownwork. In this study, Marchese and Ryan’s (2001) scale(4 items, a ¼ 0.74; sample item: ‘‘I am basically my ownboss’’) was used to measure hotel service employees’ jobautonomy. Subjects rated items using a 5-point scale(1 ¼ strongly disagree, 5 ¼ strongly agree).

3.2.5. Display rules

The emotion work requirements scale (Best et al., 1997)was used to evaluate the level of hotel companies’ displayrules. Respondents were asked the extent to which they arerequired to hide (or show) emotions to be effective on thejob (sample item: ‘‘Showing friendly emotions such assmiling, giving compliments, and making small talk’’).Negative (3 items, a ¼ 0.76) and positive (4 items,a ¼ 0.78) display rules were rated on a 5-point scale(1 ¼ not at all, 5 ¼ always required).

3.2.6. Emotional labor

Items measuring hotel service employees’ two actingstrategies came from Brotheridge and Lee’s (2003) emo-tional labor scale. Surface acting consisted of three items(a ¼ 0.69; sample item: ‘‘I pretend to have emotions that Idon’t really have’’) and deep acting had three items(a ¼ 0.87; sample item: ‘‘I really try to feel the emotionsthat I have to show as part of my job’’). Using a 5-pointscale (1 ¼ never, 5 ¼ always), respondents were asked toindicate how often they utilize the described acting modeupon dealing with customers.

ARTICLE IN PRESSH.J. Kim / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 151–161156

3.2.7. Burnout

The MBI-GS (Schaufeli et al., 1996) was used to measurethe three sub-constructs of job burnout: exhaustion(5 items, a ¼ 0.89; sample item: ‘‘I feel emotionally drainedfrom my work’’), cynicism (5 items, a ¼ 0.82; sample item:‘‘I just want to do my job and not be bothered’’),and professional efficacy (6 items, a ¼ 0.68; sample item:‘‘I have accomplished worthwhile things in this job’’). Allitems were answered on a 5-point Likert-type scale(1 ¼ strongly disagree, 5 ¼ strongly agree).

3.3. Statistical design

First, to determine the significant antecedents of emo-tional labor, two hierarchical regression analyses were runfor employees’ acting methods of surface and deep acting(dependent variables) with a set of predicted antecedents(independent variables). Among independent variables,control variables (gender, age, and experience) enteredthe regression equation first; autonomy, frequency, dura-tion, variety, display rules were grouped together as job-related variables and entered the model second; andpersonality characteristics (extraversion and neuroticism)were added last as another separate group.

Next, a series of regression equations with similarhierarchical steps were used to investigate the influence ofthe two acting modes on hotel service employees’ burnoutand determine the extent to which the acting modes serveas a mediator between burnout (dependent variable) andpersonality and job-related variables (independent vari-ables). Baron and Kenny’s (1986) method is best knownand used to test the effect of mediation: in the firstequation, a significant relationship must exist between thepredictor (independent variable) and the mediator; in thesecond equation, the predictor must be significantly relatedto the outcome (dependent variable); and last, the mediatormust affect the outcome and the effect of the predictor onthe outcome must be less in the third equation than in thesecond. If the effect of the predictor disappears (becomesinsignificant) in the third equation, the mediator is a full(complete) mediator and if the effect of the predictor stillstrongly exist but is reduced in the third equation, themediator is referred to as a partial mediator. For the lattercase, the further significance test of the mediated effect(evaluating the significant reduction of the unstandardizedbeta coefficient (B) of the predictor variable from equation2 to equation 3) is essential (for details of the test, seeFrazier et al., 2004).

The first equation (of Baron and Kenny’s method) isdone earlier by regressing emotional acting (mediator) onjob and personality characteristics (predictors). For thesecond equation, the burnout components (outcomes)were regressed on job-related and personality variables(predictors). The direct effect of dispositional factors(neuroticism and extraversion) and job characteristics(autonomy, customer contact, and display rules) onburnout has been well documented (e.g., Brotheridge and

Grandey, 2002; Cordes and Daugherty, 1993; Demeroutiet al., 2001; Kim et al., 2007; Maslach et al., 2001). Tocomplete the last equation, the burnout factors wereregressed on emotional labor strategies (mediators) andjob and personality variables (predictors). For the secondand third equations, the same control variables were usedbecause the burnout literature generally reported gender,age, and experience as effective demographic variables onburnout (Maslach et al., 2001).

4. Results

4.1. Correlations

As a preliminary test, the Pearson Correlation valueswere reviewed between independent and dependant vari-ables (Table 1). The relationships between acting strategiesand most job-related variables (autonomy, frequency,duration, variety, display rules) appeared to be prettycongruent with the proposed hypotheses. For example, allinteraction variables (frequency, duration, and variety) anddisplay rules (positive and negative) demonstrated thepositive correlations with two acting strategies, althoughnot every variable was significant. The only job variablesuggesting quite a difference from the proposed hypotheseswas autonomy. It displayed almost zero correlation withsurface acting and rather showed a significant, positivecorrelation with deep acting (r ¼ 0.18, po0.05), which wasnot really expected.The relationships between dispositional variables and

surface acting matched the research hypotheses. That is,neuroticism was positively correlated with surface acting(r ¼ 0.22, po0.01) and the direction of the relationshipbetween extraversion and surface acting was negativealthough not significant. In addition, an unexpectedsignificant positive correlation between extraversion anddeep acting (r ¼ 0.23, po0.01) was found.Directions of the relationships between employees’

surface acting and burnout were fairly consistent withthe proposed hypotheses. Surface acting had a positivecorrelation with exhaustion (r ¼ 0.30, po0.01) and cyni-cism (r ¼ 0.31, po0.01). Although insignificant, profes-sional efficacy was negatively correlated with surface actingas expected. Deep acting showed a negative correlationwith cynicism (r ¼ �0.16, po0.05) and positive correlationwith professional efficacy (r ¼ 0.28, po0.01). Thereappeared to be a negative (but not significant) correlationbetween deep acting and exhaustion, which contradictsthe research hypothesis predicting a positive relationshipbetween the two variables.

4.2. Hierarchical regression analyses

4.2.1. The relationship between emotional labor and job

variables and personality

Table 2 presents the findings on the predictors ofemotional labor (equation 1). Overall, both acting models

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 1

Descriptive statistics, reliabilities, and correlations

Variablesa M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

1. Autonomy 3.60 0.87 (0.74)

2. Frequency 3.66 1.99 �0.17* N.A.b

3. Duration 7.22 9.02 0.08 0.12 N.A.b

4. Variety 2.84 0.86 0.17* 0.26** 0.48** (0.84)

5. P. display 4.08 0.64 0.23* 0.04 0.17* 0.25** (0.78)

6. N. display 3.43 0.88 0.05 �0.00 �0.08 0.01 0.34** (0.76)

7. Extraversion 4.38 0.76 0.23** 0.09 0.07 0.14* 0.22** �0.07 (0.84)

8. Neuroticism 2.96 0.66 �0.23* 0.05 0.10 0.05 �0.07 �0.09 �0.26** (0.89)

9. Surface act 2.85 0.77 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.13 0.09 0.24** �0.09 0.22** (0.67)

10. Deep act 3.20 0.95 0.18* 0.10 0.29** 0.37** 0.45** 0.12 0.23** �0.01 0.07 (0.85)

11. Exhaustion 2.72 0.95 �0.24** 0.13 0.15* 0.03 �0.07 �0.02 �0.24** 0.44** 0.30** �0.09 (0.89)

12. Cynicism 2.48 0.96 �0.27** �0.01 0.09 �0.02 �0.17* 0.05 �0.20** 0.40** 0.31** �0.16* 0.51** (0.82)

13. Prof. efficacy 4.14 0.57 0.43** �0.02 0.12 0.20** 0.48** 0.12 0.23** �0.09 �0.07 0.28** �0.24** �0.30** (0.68)

*po0.05; **po0.01; internal reliabilities are in parentheses.aAll study variables are rated on a 5-point scale except duration. Duration indicates the average number of minutes spent on a typical service

transaction.bNA ¼ not applicable (1-item measure).

Table 2

Regression of emotional labor on job characteristics, individual char-

acteristics, and control variables

Independent variables Dependent variables

Surface acting Deep acting

Equation 1 Equation 1

b D R2 b D R2

(I) Control variables 0.04 0.03

Age �0.07 �0.09

Gender 0.14y �0.10

Tenure �0.11 �0.02

(II) Job characteristics 0.10�� 0.26��

Job autonomy 0.04 0.05

Frequency 0.01 0.03

Variety 0.11 0.18�

Duration �0.10 0.11

Positive display rules �0.02 0.33��

Negative display rules 0.31�� 0.08

(III) Individual characteristics 0.08�� 0.04�

Extraversion 0.00 0.15y

Neuroticism 0.30�� 0.06

F 3.48�� 6.10��

Total R2 0.21 0.34

Adjusted R2 0.16 0.27

Note: b, standardized beta weight.ypo0.10�po0.05��po0.01.

H.J. Kim / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 151–161 157

were significant (surface acting: F ¼ 3.48, po0.01; deepacting: F ¼ 6.10, po0.01) with a total R2 of 21% and 34%,respectively. Job-related variables made a significant R2

increment for surface acting (DR2¼ 0.10, po0.01) and

deep acting (DR2¼ 0.26, po0.01). Among six job-related

variables (frequency, variety, duration, autonomy, positivedisplay rule, and negative display rule), only negativedisplay rule (b ¼ 0.31, po0.01) was significantly related tosurface acting, whereas variety (b ¼ 0.18, po0.01) andpositive display rule (b ¼ 0.33, po0.01) were significantdeterminants of deep acting. Therefore, H1a (a positiverelationship between frequency and both acting strategies)and H1c (a positive relationship between duration anddeep acting) are rejected. H1b (a positive relationshipbetween variety and both acting modes) is partiallysupported because variety was positively related to deepacting. H1d predicts a negative effect of autonomy onsurface acting. H1d is rejected because autonomy showedno relationship with surface acting. H1e states that bothdisplay rules will be positively related to both actingmethods. This hypothesis is partially supported becauseeach display rule was associated with only one particularacting strategy.Following the entry of dispositional variables, there were

significant increments in R2 of both acting models (surfaceacting: DR2

¼ 0.08, po0.01; deep acting: DR2¼ 0.04,

po0.05). The analyses indicated that neuroticism issignificantly associated with surface acting (b ¼ 0.30,po0.01) and extraversion may be marginally related todeep acting (b ¼ 0.15, p ¼ 0.061). Hence, H2a regarding apositive relationship between neuroticism and surfaceacting is supported and the other hypothesis (H2b)concerning a negative effect of extraversion on surfaceacting is rejected.

4.2.2. Emotional labor as a mediator and its effect on

burnout

Table 3 presents the results of the regression analysesconducted to examine the role of emotional labor as amediator and its influence on burnout. In equation 2(without acting variables), autonomy was negatively

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 3

Regression of burnout on job characteristics, individual characteristics, and control variables (equation 2) and acting strategies (equation 3)

Independent variables Dependent variables

Exhaustion Cynicism Prof. efficacy

Equation 2 Equation 3 Equation 2 Equation 3 Equation 2 Equation 3

bi bt D R2 bi bt D R2 bi bt D R2

(I) Control variables 0.01 0.01 0.00

Age �0.03 0.03 �0.08 �0.06 0.11 0.10

Gender �0.03 0.05 �0.09 �0.11 �0.02 �0.02

Tenure 0.11 0.14 0.00 0.02 �0.02 �0.01

(II) Job characteristics 0.07� 0.11�� 0.29��

Job autonomy �0.15� �0.15� �0.26�� �0.25�� 0.30�� 0.30��

Frequency 0.11 0.13 �0.10 �0.09 0.02 0.02

Variety 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.03

Duration 0.09 0.06 0.04 0.01 �0.12 �0.12

Positive display rules �0.02 0.01 �0.09 �0.03 0.36�� 0.21��

Negative display rules 0.01 �0.05 0.09 0.02 0.04 0.03

(III) Individual characteristics 0.15�� 0.10�� 0.02

Extraversion �0.11 �0.11 �0.05 �0.05 0.12 0.11

Neuroticism 0.34�� 0.20�� a 0.31�� 0.22�� a 0.07 0.07

(IV) Acting strategies 0.10�� 0.12�� 0.08��

Surface acting 0.30�� 0.32�� 0.02

Deep acting �0.06 �0.15y 0.27��

F 4.84�� 5.03�� 5.93��

Total R2 0.33 0.34 0.38

Adjusted R2 0.26 0.27 0.32

Note: bi, standardized beta weight without emotional labor variables; bt, final beta (standardized) coefficient after all variables have been entered.aThe significant reduction of the unstandardized beta coefficient (B) is tested (B values are reported in the result section of the paper). For the detailed

test procedure, review Frazier et al.’s (2004) article.ypo0.10�po0.05��po 0.01.

H.J. Kim / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 151–161158

related to exhaustion (b ¼ �0.15, po0.05) and neuroticismwas positively related to exhaustion (b ¼ 0.34, po0.01).The entry of emotional labor contributed unique variance(DR2

¼ 0.10, po0.01) to the model (equation 3) and thefinal model showed three variables as significant predictorsof exhaustion: autonomy (b ¼ �0.15, po0.05), neuroti-cism (b ¼ 0.20, po0.01), and surface acting (b ¼ 0.33,po0.01). Surface acting displayed a positive effect onexhaustion as expected. Compared with the results ofequation 2, the final model (equation 3) indicated surfaceacting as a possible partial mediator between neuroticismand exhaustion. The further test confirmed partial media-tion by demonstrating that although the effect of neuroti-cism remained strong, it was significantly reduced after theentry of emotional labor (B ¼ 0.63 in equation 2 toB ¼ 0.45 in equation 3, po0:05; for the detailed procedure,see Frazier et al., 2004).

As with exhaustion, the model for cynicism (equation 2)indicated autonomy (b ¼ �0.26, po0.01) and neuroticism(b ¼ 0.31, po0.01) as significant determinants of cynicism.When emotional labor was entered, there was a significant

increment in R2 of the model (DR2¼ 0.12, po0.01).

Surface acting had a significant, positive beta coefficient(b ¼ 0.34, po0.01) and deep acting showed a marginallysignificant, negative coefficient (b ¼ �0.15, p ¼ 0.057).The third (final) model included autonomy (b ¼ �0.25,po0.01), neuroticism (b ¼ 0.22, p ¼ 0.01), surface acting,and deep acting as significant predictors of cynicism.A comparison of the results of equations 2 and 3 suggestedthat surface acting is a partial mediator between neuroti-cism and cynicism. The further mediation test confirmedpartial mediation. When emotional labor was added to themodel, the effect of cynicism on exhaustion was signifi-cantly reduced (B ¼ 0.63 in equation 2 to B ¼ 0.45 inequation 3, po0.05).Lastly, professional efficacy (in equation 2) was posi-

tively related to positive display rules (b ¼ 0.36, po0.01)and autonomy (b ¼ 0.30, po0.01); and neither personalityvariable was related to professional efficacy. Emotionallabor explained 8% of the variance of the model(equation 3) and deep acting had a significant, positivebeta coefficient as predicted (b ¼ 0.27, po0.01). In the

ARTICLE IN PRESSH.J. Kim / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 151–161 159

third (final) equation, in addition to deep acting, autonomy(b ¼ 0.30, po0.01) and positive display rules (b ¼ 0.21,po0.01) were significant. In the same manner, a review ofthe results of equations 2 and 3 indicated that deep actingis a partial mediator between positive display rulesand professional efficacy because of the significantlyreduced effect of the positive display rule in the finalequation (B ¼ 0.45 in equation 2 to B ¼ 0.21 in equation 3,po0.05).

Based on the above results, the following hypotheses aresupported: a positive effect of surface acting on exhaustion(H3a); a positive impact of surface acting on cynicism(H3b); a negative effect of deep acting on cynicism (H4b);and a positive influence of deep acting on professionalefficacy (H4c). The two hypotheses predicting a negativerelationship between surface acting and professionalefficacy (H3c) and a positive effect of deep acting onexhaustion (H4a) are rejected. With regard to the mediat-ing role of emotional labor between burnout and job andpersonality variables (H5), no full mediation was found.Only partial mediation was detected in the following threerelationships: neuroticism - surface acting- exhaustion;neuroticism - surface acting - cynicism; positive displayrule - deep acting - professional efficacy.

5. Discussion

5.1. Antecedents of emotional labor strategies

Overall, demographic variables did not have much effecton hotel service workers’ emotional labor. Only gendershowed a marginally significant effect (p ¼ 0.06) on theacting strategies. Hochschild (1983) argued that womenlearn to be more expressive from young because of theexpectations from society, and other emotional laborexperts support Hochschild’s (1983) view. However, littleresearch has found what type of emotional acting femalesuse to be more expressive. The further investigation (t-test,p ¼ 0.06) indicates that females (M ¼ 2.91) do moresurface acting than males (M ¼ 2.70). That is, womenmanage their emotional expressions by faking feelingswhen needed.

The previous findings on the relationships betweenemotional labor strategies and interaction characteristicshave not been clear-cut. The results of this study are mostlyin harmony with Diefendorff et al.’s (2005) study, reportingcustomer interaction variables as the significant determi-nants of deep acting only. The present research demon-strates no impact of interaction variables on surface acting.Variety and duration were significantly correlated(po0.01) with deep acting, indicating that when serviceencounters are longer, employees may have a better chanceto develop proper emotions and those who express morevarious emotions are more likely to be deep actors tryinghard to experience the desired emotions. However, in theregression analysis, only variety appeared as a significantpredictor of deep acting. These two independent variables

had a high correlation (r ¼ 0.48), which may explain whythe effect of duration became weak in the regressionanalysis.The relationships between display rules and employees’

acting modes are worth noting. It was initially postulatedthat both display rules would be positively related to bothstyles of acting. However, the positive display rule seems tolead to only deep acting and the negative display rule leadsto surface acting. These results are congruent withDiefendorff et al.’s (2005) findings. In other words, whenpeople are asked to display positive emotions (e.g., smilingand being friendly), they actively try to experience theemotions, but when people are asked to hide negativeemotions (e.g., suppressing anger), they just pretend not toshow those negative feelings.The finding regarding the positive impact of NA on

surface acting has been consistent and the present studyalso supports it with the personality trait of neuroticism. Itmay be difficult for individuals who experience negativeemotions frequently to modify inner feelings (deep acting)to meet their service role as a happy host in hotels;consequently, they are more likely to fake positiveemotions when necessary. The result on the effect ofextraversion is interesting. Different from most previousfindings, this study demonstrates no negative relationshipwith surface acting. Both correlation (po0.01) andregression analyses (marginally significant at p ¼ 0.061)rather indicate some possibility of the positive influenceon deep acting. In other words, hotel personnel high inextraversion actively try to feel the emotions that theyneed to display to customers. Extraverted individuals aresociable, gregarious, assertive, and active (Goldberg, 1990).Because of their active nature, they may choose to makeemotive efforts (deep acting) instead of simply fakingemotions (surface acting)

5.2. The mediated effect and outcomes of emotional labor

strategies

Deep acting did not contribute positively to hotel serviceemployees’ exhaustion. Surface acting was confirmed tohave a positive influence on service providers’ exhaustion.Altogether, these results lead to the conclusion that hotelpersonnel who feign emotions (surface acting) are morelikely to be emotionally exhausted than those who strive toinvoke the appropriate feelings (deep feeling). Even thoughthese findings contradict Hochshild’s (1983) original notionthat those who identify too wholeheartedly with the jobhave a higher risk of burnout, empirical results by otherresearchers have also shown that the proposition maynot be true (Kruml and Geddes, 1997; Brotheridge andLee, 2003).As expected, cynicism demonstrated a positive relation-

ship with surface acting and a negative relationship withdeep acting and these outcomes are sensible. The harderemployees try to feel the proper emotions, the more likelythey put themselves in customers’ shoes. These employees

ARTICLE IN PRESSH.J. Kim / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 151–161160

are more likely to treat hotel guests as persons rather thanobjects, thereby reducing a possibility of becoming cynical.On the other hand, the more they surface act, the morelikely they distance themselves from hotel guests, whichultimately can lead them to be cynical about their job.Lastly, deep actors’ attempts to reach out (be emotionallyconnected with) customers may naturally encourage themto offer the best, sincere service, resulting in a strong senseof professional efficacy.

Overall, the results of this study did not successfullysupport the mediated effect of emotional labor. Emotionallabor strategies mostly served as a partial mediator in afew, limited situations (i.e., between neuroticism andburnout and between positive display rules and burnout).Mediators provide the mechanism behind the relationbetween predictors and outcomes (Frazier et al., 2004). Inother words, emotional labor strategies may explain whyand how neuroticism and positive display rules lead to theburnout factors. More specifically, the reason why hotelpersonnel high in neuroticism have a greater level ofburnout (i.e., exhaustion and cynicism) is that in part, theyare likely to rely on surface acting when dealing withguests. In the same manner, the reason why company’spositive display rules can increase hotel employees’professional efficacy is that positive rules are likely tomotivate employees to do deep acting.

6. Managerial implications and future research

Emotional labor has recently received tremendousattention because of its double-edged effects: It could havea negative influence on employees’ well-being, but positiveimpact on company success. The results of this studysuggest that emotional labor may not necessarily causehotel service agents’ burnout if they choose to make sincereefforts to experience the appropriate emotions (deepacting), which shares the new outlook on the relationshipbetween emotional labor and burnout (Kruml andGeddes,1997; Brotheridge and Lee, 2003). It sends acrucial message to hotel practitioners that education andtraining may be necessary to change employees’ actingmode into a proper one. For example, when hotel guestsare angry, service providers should learn to express a‘‘sincere’’ (not superficial) apology. When customers feelthat the apology is true with proper remedies, customersare likely to be satisfied, which in turn, may makeemployees pleased, leading to decrease in stress. As thescenario given, deep acting can benefit hotel serviceworkers and customers alike.

The result of the present research supports thatemotional expression and management is dependent onindividuals’ dispositional factors. Therefore, it may beimportant to review hotel job applicants’ personalityprofiles prior to selection. Research has shown that thedetection by customers of inauthentic expression may leadto even poorer perceptions of service quality (Rafaeli andSutton, 1987; Mann, 1999b). Hotel human resource

managers should consider recruiting people high inextraversion and low in neuroticism because these typesof applicants are more likely to increase hotel guests’perceptions of service quality and customer satisfactionthrough deep acting, and experience less burnout. In futureresearch, it is recommended to consider other individualvariables to find a more comprehensive personality profileof who are likely to be deep actors in the hospitalityindustry. For example, people high in agreeableness (one ofthe Big Five) are likely to exert more effort (deep acting) asthese individuals strive to maintain a positive relationshipand genuinely care about others’ well-being (Diefendorffet al., 2005).The variety of emotional expression significantly resulted

in deep acting. The length of service transactions varies inhotels. For instance, hotel sales personnel may speak withpotential customers for a longer period of time to bring intheir business to the hotel than receptionists greeting andchecking in guests briefly at the front desk. Although alonger encounter may give a better chance to express avariety of emotions, it seems to be important to train hotelpersonnel to express various, appropriate emotions evenduring short encounters with customers so that employeescan remain deep actors.The negative display rule was a significant predictor of

surface acting and the positive display rule was a significantpredictor of deep acting. As Diefendorff et al. (2005)pointed out, people may experience more emotionalconflicts or dissonance when they are told what not toexpress (negative display rules) than what to express(positive display rules). Hotel management should under-stand this psychology and strive to communicate morepositive norms with employees so that service providers aremotivated to act ‘‘in good faith’’ and ultimately boost theirprofessional efficacy.Job autonomy appears to need further research.

Although the effect of autonomy was not significant inthe regression analysis, autonomy showed a significant,positive correlation with deep acting (po0.05), which wasan unexpected result. It is recommended to repeat the sameresearch question using a large sample for more solidmanagerial implications. If this relationship holds true,hoteliers should consider providing more autonomy toservice workers so that they become more willing to deepact when handling guests.Lastly, it is important to note that the survey return rate

was low in this study. People who have already experiencedstress at work or perceive burnout as a sensitive issue maynot bother to fill the questionnaire. Keegan and Lucas(2005) addressed the need of extra caution for postalsurveys targeting a business population especially when thesurvey contains job-related questions. Because of the smallsample size with a low response rate, the ability togeneralize the current findings is limited. The small samplesize also can prevent researchers from detecting all effectiverelationships hypothesized. Overall not too many proposedrelationships were supported in equations 1 and 2,

ARTICLE IN PRESSH.J. Kim / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 151–161 161

naturally resulting in the small number of mediated effects(in equation 3). Therefore, it is recommended to conduct avalidation study with a larger sample and other statisticalmethods such as structural equations modeling (SEM).

References

Ashforth, B.E., Humphrey, R.H., 1993. Emotional labor in service roles:

the influence of identity. Academy of Management Review 18 (1),

88–115.

Ashkanasy, N.M., Hartel, C.E.J., Daus, C.S., 2002. Diversity and

emotion: the new frontiers in organizational behavior research.

Journal of Management 28 (3), 307–338.

Baron, R.M., Kenny, D.A., 1986. The moderator–mediator variable

distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and

statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

51 (6), 1173–1182.

Best, R.G., Downey, R.G., Jones, R.G., 1997. Incumbent perceptions of

emotional work requirements. Paper presented at the 12th annual

conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psycho-

logy, St. Louis, MO.

Bitner, M.J., 1990. Evaluating service encounters: the effects of physical

surroundings and employee responses. Journal of Marketing 54 (2),

69–82.

Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H., Mohr, L.A., 1994. Critical service encounters:

the employee’s viewpoint. Journal of Marketing 58 (4), 95–106.

Brotheridge, C.M., Grandey, A.A., 2002. Emotional labor and burnout:

comparing two perspectives of people work. Journal of Vocational

Behavior 60, 17–39.

Brotheridge, C.M., Lee, R.T., 2002. Testing a conservation of resources

model of the dynamics of emotional labor. Journal of Occupational

Health Psychology 7 (1), 57–67.

Brotheridge, C.M., Lee, R.T., 2003. Development and validation of the

emotional labor scale. Journal of Occupational and Organizational

Psychology 76, 365–379.

Cordes, D., Daugherty, T.W., 1993. A review and an integration of

research on job burnout. Academy of Management Review 18 (4),

621–656.

Diefendorff, J.M., Richard, E.M., 2003. Antecedents and consequences of

emotional display rule perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology 88

(2), 284–294.

Diefendorff, J.M., Croyle, M.H., Gosserand, R.H., 2005. The dimension-

ality and antecedents of emotional labor strategies. Journal of

Vocational Behavior 66, 339–357.

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A.B., Nachreiner, F., Schaufeli, W.B., 2001. The

job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied

Psychology 86, 499–512.

Domagalski, T.A., 1999. Emotion in organizations: main currents.

Human Relations 52, 833–852.

Frazier, P.A., Tix, A.P., Barron, K.E., 2004. Testing moderator and

mediator effects in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling

Psychology 51 (1), 115–134.

Goldberg, L.R., 1990. An alternative ‘‘description of personality’’: the

Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psycho-

logy 59, 1216–1229.

Goldberg, L.R., 2001. International Personality Item Pool website.

/http://ipip.ori.org/ipip/S.

Gosserand, R.H., Diefendorff, J.M., 2005. Display rules and emotional

labor: the moderating role of commitment. Journal of Applied

Psychology 90 (6), 1256–1264.

Grandey, A.A., 2000. Emotion regulation in the workplace: a new way

to conceptualize emotional labor. Journal of Occupational health

Psychology 5 (1), 95–110.

Grandey, A.A., 2003. When the show must go on: surface acting and deep

acting as determinants of emotional exhaustion and peer-rated service

delivery. Academy of Management Journal 46, 86–96.

Hochschild, A.R., 1979. Emotion work, feeling rules, and social structure.

American Journal of Sociology 85 (3), 551–575.

Hochschild, A.R., 1983. The Managed Heart: Commercialization of

Human Feeling. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Keegan, S.N., Lucas, R., 2005. Hospitality to hostility: dealing with low

response rates in postal surveys. International Journal of Hospitality

Management 24 (2), 157–169.

Kim, H.J., Shin, K., Umbreit, T., 2007. Hotel job burnout: the role of

personality characteristics. International Journal of Hospitality

Management 26 (2), 421–434.

Kruml, S.M., Geddes, D., 1997. Catching fire without burning out:

is there an ideal way to perform emotional labor? In: Ahkanasy, N.M.,

Hartel, D.E.J., Zerbe, W.J. (Eds.), Emotions In the Workplace:

Theory, Research, and Practice. Quorum Books, Westport, CT,

pp. 177–188.

Kruml, S.M., Geddes, D., 2000. Exploring the dimensions of emotional

labor: the heart of Hoschschild’s work. Management Communication

Quarterly 14 (1), 8–49.

Lee, R.T., Ashforth, B.E., 1990. On the meaning of Maslach’s

three dimensions of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology 75,

743–747.

Mann, S., 1999a. Emotion at work: to what extent are we expressing,

suppressing or faking it? European Journal of Work and Organiza-

tional Psychology 8, 347–369.

Mann, S., 1999b. Hiding What We Feel, Faking What We Don’t:

Understanding the Role of Your Emotions at Work. Harper-Collins,

New York.

Marchese, M.C., Ryan, J., 2001. Capitalizing on the benefits of utilizing

part-time employees through job autonomy. Journal of Business and

Psychology 15, 549–560.

Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W.B., Leiter, M.P., 2001. Job burnout. Annual

Review of Psychology 52, 397–422.

Morris, J.A., Feldman, D.C., 1996. The dimensions, antecedents, and

consequences of emotional labor. The Academy of Management

Review 21 (4), 986–1010.

Morris, J.A., Feldman, D.C., 1997. Managing emotions in the workplace.

Journal of Managerial Issues 9 (3), 257–274.

Pugh, D., 2001. Service with a smile: Emotional contagion in service

encounters. Academy of Management Journal 44, 1018–1027.

Pugliesi, K., 1999. The consequences of emotional labor: effects on work

stress, job satisfaction, and well-being. Motivation and Emotion 23 (2),

125–154.

Rafaeli, A., Sutton, R.I., 1987. Expression of emotion as part of the work

role. Academy of Management Review 12, 23–37.

Sandiford, P.J., Seymour, D., 2002. Emotional labor in public houses:

reflections on a pilot study. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism

Research 26 (1), 54–70.

Schaufeli, W.B., Leiter, M.P., Maslach, C., Jackson, S.E., 1996.

The Maslach burnout inventory: general survey (MBI-GS). In:

Maslach, C., Jackson, S.E., Leiter, M.P. (Eds.), Maslach Burnout

Inventory Manual, 3rd Edition. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo

Alto, CA, pp. 19–26.

Seymour, D., 2000. Emotional labor: a comparison between fast food

and traditional service work. International Journal of Hospitality

Management 19, 159–171.

Sharrad, H., 1992. Feeling the strain: job stress and satisfaction of direct-

care staff in the mental handicap service. British Journal of Mental

Subnormality 38, 32–38.

Tolich, M., 1993. Alienating and liberating emotions at work: super-

market clerks’ performance of customer service. Journal of Con-

temporary Ethnography 22, 361–381.

Wharton, A.S., 1993. The affective consequences of service work:

managing emotions on the job. Work and Occupations 20 (2),

205–232.

Zepf, D., Sfifert, C., Schmutte, B., Mertini, H., Holz, M., 2001. Emotion

work and job stressors and their effects on burnout. Psychology and

Health 16, 527–545.