The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Dimensionality and validity of the Burnout Measure
Abstract
The dimensionality and validity of the BM (Burnout Measure) is investigated in Dutch samples of human services professionals and white‐collar workers (total N = 2190). Results show that, in contrast to the presumed dimensions ‘physical exhaustion’, ‘emotional exhaustion’ and ‘mental exhaustion’, the factors of the BM are ‘demoralization’, ‘exhaustion’, and ‘loss of motive’. The factorial structure is not affected by using different time frames although an unrestricted time frame results in significantly higher mean scores. A BM version with a seven‐point Likert scale results in more reliable subscales than a five‐point scale. The factor ‘loss of motive’ is substantially affected by inconsistent answering patterns of the respondents. The three‐factor model of the BM fits equally well in samples of professionals with and without patient contact. The BM subscales correlate highly with fatigue and with the dimension ‘emotional exhaustion’ of the Maslach‐Burnout‐Inventory (MBI) but cannot be distinguished from psychological strain and psychosomatic complaints. Problems in the conceptualization of burnout and its operationalization are discussed. It is concluded that the BM captures only a particular aspect of burnout and is rather a measure of general well‐being. Recommendations for further use of a modified BM are given.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL): A self-report symptom inventory
Derogatis, L. R., Lipman, R. S., Rickels, K., Uhlenhuth, E. H., & Covi, L. (1974) · Behavioral Science · doi:10.1002/bs.3830190102 · Cited by 4,604
Cited by
Gender differences in burnout: A meta-analysis
Purvanova, R. K., & Muros, J. P. (2010) · Journal of Vocational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2010.04.006 · Cited by 1,050
Melamed, S., Shirom, A., Toker, S., Berliner, S., & Shapira, I. (2006) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.327 · Cited by 943
The Burnout Measure, Short Version.
Malach-Pines, A. (2005) · International Journal of Stress Management · doi:10.1037/1072-5245.12.1.78 · Cited by 610
Burnout syndrome in secondary school teachers: a systematic review and meta-analysis
García-Carmona, M., Marín, M. D., & Aguayo, R. (2019) · Social Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/s11218-018-9471-9 · Cited by 370
Past performance and future perspectives of burnout research
Schaufeli, W. B. (2003) · SA Journal of Industrial Psychology · doi:10.4102/sajip.v29i4.127 · Cited by 309
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Enzmann, D., Schaufeli, W. B., Janssen, P., & Rozeman, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-12
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 331-351
- ISSN
- 0963-1798 (ISSN-L)
- 2044-8325
- OpenAlex
- W2036797126
- Cited by
- 194
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Dimensionality and validity of the Burnout Measure. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1998.tb00680.x
- The paper
- Enzmann, D., Schaufeli, W. B., Janssen, P., & Rozeman, A. (1998). Dimensionality and validity of the Burnout Measure. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1998.tb00680.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.