Behind the Mask of Emotional Labour: An Integrative Model

Ms Catherine Jordan*
Business School, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
Email: catherine.jordan@uwa.edu.au

Dr. Sandra Kiffin-Petersen

Business School, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
Email: sandra.kiffin-petersen@uwa.edu.au

Professor Geoffrey Soutar

Business School, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
Email: geoff.soutar@uwa.edu.au

Preferred Stream: Stream 11

Profile:
Catherine Jordan is a lecturer at the University of Western Australia (UWA). Catherine teaches
business statistics on the UWA MBA programs in Perth and Singapore. Catherine’s scholarly
background is in the area of organisational psychology. Catherine is currently researching in the areas
of emotional labour, organisational commitment, and organisational citizenship behaviour.
 Behind the Mask of Emotional Labour: An Integrative Model

ABSTRACT

The recent inception of emotional labour research is due, in the most part, to the rapid expansion of
the service sector. Emotional labour (EL) refers to the mechanisms employees use to adjust their
outward expression of emotion in accordance with organisational and societal norms during
employee-customer interactions. This is differentiated from emotion work which is the management of
emotions during employee-employee interactions. There is little agreement on the definition,
conceptualisation and measurement of emotional labour. Specifically, this research has four main
streams: 1) emotional job demands, 2) emotional expression, 3) emotional dissonance, and 4)
emotion regulation strategies. This paper seeks to understand what is behind the ‘mask’ of EL by
presenting an integrative model that includes the four conceptualisations of EL. The model extends
previous work with the inclusion of emotion work regulation processes, continuance and affective
commitment, and extrinsic and intrinsic job satisfaction. Future research is required to empirically
test the model in a variety of contexts and occupations.

Keywords: Emotions, interpersonal behaviour, job design, attitudes

INTRODUCING EMOTIONAL LABOUR

Emotions are a part of everyday life however the area of emotions in the workplace has only
recently gained the attention of researchers and practitioners. Despite its recent beginnings, this area
has grown rapidly, as can be seen with the growing number of edited books (Ashkanasy, Hartel &
Zerbe 2000; Ashkanasy, Zerbe & Hartel 2002; Fineman 1993; Lord, Klimoski & Kanfer 2002),
special edition journal issues (e.g. Journal of Organizational Behavior 2000, Organizational Behavior
and Human Processes 2001, Motivation and Emotion 2002, Human Resource Management Review
2002, Leadership Quarterly 2002, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
1999), authored books (e.g. Hochschild 1983; Smith 1992), dedicated conferences (e.g. International
Society for Research on Emotions, Asia-Pacific Symposium on Emotions in Worklife, Emotions and
Organizational Life), and email groups (e.g. EMONET) that have examined emotions at work. This
increased attention from researchers may be due, in part, to the rapid growth in the service sector and
the need to explore in-depth the nature of EL and its relationships with important organisational
outcomes such as job satisfaction and burnout.
The services sector has seen substantial growth in the past few decades. Figure 1 shows the
increase in the number of workers in Australia’s service sector compared to the country’s
manufacturing and other sectors (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2005). It is clear that, while
manufacturing and other sectors have remained relatively stable, the number of employees in the
service sector over the past two decades has almost doubled. The growth and expansion of the service
sector has meant increased competition that have led organisations to use EL strategies (e.g. ‘service
with a smile’) to gain a competitive advantage (Rafaeli & Sutton 1989; Bailey & McCollough 2000).

1
Figure 1: The Number of Australians Employed by Industry

Total Number of Employees Per Industry Grouping

9000

8000
Number of Persons Employed (000s)

7000

6000

5000 Service
Industries
4000
Manufacturing
3000 Industry
Other
2000

1000

0
1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006
Year

(Australian Bureau of Statistics 2005)

This has resulted in a diverse and somewhat disjointed body of research into EL, which is not
uncommon for a research area in its infancy. This diversity includes the methodologies that have been
used (e.g. quantitative, qualitative and observational), the divergent definitions suggested, the
different measures utilised and the different research streams that have evolved. This paper presents
an integrative model of EL which is inclusive of the main theoretical approaches to studying EL. A
unique contribution is also made with the inclusion of emotion work (surface and deep acting) and
dimensions of job satisfaction (intrinsic and extrinsic) and organisational commitment (affective and
continuance). This model provides a new level to understanding the complex relationships of EL.

INTEGRATING EMOTIONAL LABOUR CONCEPTS

The term ‘emotional labour’ was first introduced by Hochschild (1979; 1983). In her seminal
work, The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling, Hochschild (1983: 7) defined EL
as ‘the management of feeling to create a publicly observable facial or bodily display’. Hochschild
(1983) provided three main contributions to the EL literature: 1) understanding the EL of particular
occupations (e.g. flight attendants and debt collectors), 2) describing feeling rules, and 3) feeling
management through surface and deep acting strategies. Hochschild’s book was the inception of the
EL literature and the origin of almost all of the emergent research streams. Despite having the same
foundation, EL researchers have drawn upon different aspects of Hochschild’s work and hence the
area has developed into four main, and quite separate, streams of research: 1) emotional job demands
(e.g. Morris & Feldman 1996; 1997), 2) emotional expression (e.g. Ashforth & Humphrey 1993;

2
Glomb & Tews 2004; Zapf, Vogt, Seifert, Mertini & Isic 1999), 3) emotional dissonance (e.g.
Abraham 1999a; 2000; Adelmann 1995; Kruml & Geddes 2000; Mann 1999; Morris & Feldman
1997), and 4) emotion regulation strategies (e.g. Brotheridge & Lee 1998; 2003; Grandey 2000;
2003). To understand how the various conceptualisations are related to one another, there is a need to
look behind the outward display of emotion or the ‘mask’ of EL, to how emotional expression and
dissonance are linked to particular outcomes such as emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction. Many
researchers believe that the link is the internal regulation process that an employee engages in to
express the appropriate emotional display.
Recent studies have focused on EL as a process of internal emotion regulation (Brotheridge &
Lee 1998; Brotheridge & Lee 2003; Grandey 2000; Grandey 2003), as this provides the link between
the dissonance experienced and the expressed emotion (Glomb & Tews 2004). Managing emotions to
create an emotional display that conforms with specific display rules typically requires some form of
self-regulation on the part of the employee. When employees attempt to regulate their emotional
displays in order to meet societal, occupational or organisational norms they experience emotional
dissonance (ED) (Ashforth & Humphrey 1993). To regulate their emotions employees engage in
either surface or deep acting (Hochschild 1983). In surface acting, ‘employees try to manage the
visible aspects of emotions that appear on the ‘surface’ and which can be noticed by the interaction
partner to bring them in line with the organizational display rules while the inner feelings remain
unchanged’ (Zapf 2002: 244). ED therefore exists between what the employee is feeling and the
outward expression of the emotion. In deep acting, employees attempt to feel the emotions they are
required to express as part of their job requirements. The key difference between the two strategies is
that with deep acting, ‘not only the expressive behaviour but also the inner feelings are regulated’
(Zapf 2002: 244). Recent research has found that the strategies are independent of each other, which
suggests that individuals may engage in both strategies in varying contexts (Beal, Trougakos, Weiss
& Green 2006). The strategies have also been found to differentially predict organisational outcomes,
supporting the need to conceptually and empirically distinguish between them (Brotheridge &
Grandey 2002; Grandey 2003). Conceptualising EL as an internal regulation process (surface and
deep acting) provides information regarding the link between 1) situational factors (emotional job
demands), and 2) the expressed emotion and the experienced dissonance when this expression is not
aligned with true feelings (ED). This conceptualisation has been adopted in this paper.

AN INTEGRATIVE MODEL OF EL
The proposed model, presented as Figure 2 overleaf, integrates all four conceptualisations of
EL as different stages of the EL process, rather than opposing views. No research to-date has
conceptually integrated all four research streams. In particular, there are four main models that have
provided a significant contribution to understanding EL. Morris and Feldman (1996) developed and
tested a model of EL which combined the dimensions of emotional job demands and ED. Similarly,

3
Glomb and Tews (2004) presented a four quadrant model of EL which combined the concepts of
emotional expression, ED and emotion regulation strategies. This model explained the four different
states that an employee may experience (‘nothing felt or displayed’, ‘appropriate suppressed display’,
‘appropriate faked display’ and ‘appropriate genuine display’). These two models provide a combined
view of some EL concepts, however they fall short in providing an understanding of the relationship
between EL and antecedents and outcomes.

Figure 2: An Integrative Model of Emotional Labour

Job Demands Emotional Labour Internal Processes Outcomes

Job Characteristics Strategies Burnout
• Autonomy • Emotional
• Feedback from the Job Emotional Labour • Emotional Dissonance Exhaustion
• Task Significance • Surface Acting • Emotional Effort • Depersonalisation
Emotional Job Demands • Deep Acting • Cognitive Effort • Personal
• Variety Accomplishment
• Frequency Emotion Work
• Intensity • Surface Acting Job Satisfaction
• Duration • Deep Acting • Intrinsic
• Extrinsic
Employee Genuine Expression
Organisational
Attributes Commitment
Affect • Affective
• Positive • Continuance
• Negative

In the literature, two more persuasive models of EL have emerged (Grandey 2000; Rubin,
Tardino, Daus & Munz 2005). These models include variables that help explain the antecedents,
outcomes and mediators of EL. Rubin et al. (2005), provided a theoretical model which integrated
ED, EL, job-specific (job characteristics) and emotion-specific antecedent variables. The outcome
variables include job attitudes, health and psychological well-being and job related behaviours.
Grandey (2000) presented a model of emotion regulation based on Gross’s work (1998) on
antecedent-focused strategies (similar to Hochschild’s 1983 ‘deep acting’), and response-focused
strategies (similar to ‘deep acting’) whereby the individual adjusts their physiology or outward
expression of emotion. These two strategies were central to Grandey’s model of EL. Grandey also
included antecedents of emotional job demands and ED to further explain EL and its link with
burnout. Only parts of this model have been tested to date (Totterdell & Holman 2003). These models
are useful to understand the complex EL relations, but do not include all four facets of EL.
At the core of the integrative model proposed in this paper is the concept of emotion
management as internal emotion regulation. According to Hochschild (1983), emotion management
has two forms: emotion work and EL. Hochschild clearly refers to EL as emotion management
undertaken as part of the job and emotion work as emotion management performed in private.
Therefore, EL occurs during employees’ interactions with customer and emotion work occurs during

4
the employees’ interactions with co-workers (Callaghan & McCollum 2002). With respect to emotion
work, there appears to be nothing in the current literature which has considered or examined the
processes of emotional regulation that employees use to adjust their outward expressions of emotion
during interpersonal interactions with other employees. Given previous research into EL and
emotional regulation it seems reasonable to propose that employees may also engage in surface and
deep acting during emotion work. Although emotion work is discretionary, there is use value in
employees maintaining positive interpersonal relationships with their co-workers such as reduced
conflict and more harmonious workplace relations. Therefore, the inclusion of emotion work in the
model provides a more holistic approach to understanding the relationship between emotion
management and antecedents and outcomes.
The conservation of resources theory (Hobfoll 1989, 1998 as cited in Brotheridge & Lee
2002) has been used to explain the process of EL and its link to emotional exhaustion. Specifically,
this theory suggests that when there is an imbalance between demands and resources the result is
stress, so when EL does not yield the desired response (from customers, co-workers etc) and thus is
no longer a rewarding exchange then estrangement, strain and detachment may occur (Brotheridge &
Lee 2002). This theory may help to explain why surface acting is more closely linked with burnout
than deep acting. In particular, surface acting may not be as highly valued by customers, and thus
there is a potentially greater depletion of emotional resources. An imbalance between investment and
gain may lead to emotional exhaustion (Cropanzano, Rupp & Byrne 2003). The proposed model also
suggests that the stress associated with managing EL may also influence employees’ attitudes
including their job satisfaction and commitment to the organisation. In the ensuing paragraphs each of
the variables in the integrative model of EL will be discussed in more detail.

ANTECEDENTS, MEDIATORS AND OUTCOMES

Although the EL research is still in the early stages several antecedent, mediators and
outcome variables have been studied. These studies have used different conceptualisations and
measures of EL and hence different, and often conflicting, findings have emerged.

Antecedents
Job characteristics
According to the well-established research by Hackman and Oldham (1975) there are seven
key job characteristics: skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, feedback from the job,
feedback from agents, and dealing with others. The more these factors are present in the job the
greater is the potential for employees to be highly motivated and hence the potential for higher
performance quality and employee satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham 1980). Humphrey (2000)
provided a compelling theoretical argument for the inclusion of job characteristics. Specifically,
Humphrey argued that job characteristics 1) impact the employee’s emotional display, 2) develop and

5
refine display rules, and 3) influence individual differences (such as emotional intelligence) which
impacts the emotional display. To-date, only job autonomy has been studied with EL (Abraham 1998;
Adelmann 1995; Erickson & Ritter 2001; Kruml & Geddes 2000; Morris & Feldman 1997; Pugliesi
1999; Totterdell & Holman 2003; Wharton 1993; Zapf et al. 1999). Empirical studies of job autonomy
(also known as job control and job discretion) have not provided clear evidence of a link to EL. For
example, several researchers found that the more job autonomy the less EL (Kruml & Geddes 2000;
Morris & Feldman 1997). However, a study by Abraham (1998) found the opposite in that autonomy
and ED were positively related. These studies have conceptualised and measured EL in different ways
therefore it is unknown whether job autonomy is sample-specific or related to some measures of EL
and not others. Further research is required to clarify this relationship.
Proposition 1: Job characteristics (i.e. task significance, autonomy and feedback from the job) will be
negatively related to surface acting.
Proposition 2: Job characteristics (i.e. task significance, autonomy and feedback from the job) will be
negatively related to deep acting.
Emotional job demands
Emotional job demands (EJD) are most commonly measured according to four dimensions
proposed by Morris and Feldman (1996): variety, frequency, duration and intensity. Morris and
Feldman (1996) proposed that the greater the demand for intense emotions, a variety of emotions and
the greater the duration of required emotional displays, the greater the EL. Researchers are yet to
establish this link empirically (Brotheridge & Lee 2003; Morris & Feldman 1997). Recent research
has used EJD to further understand the emotional content of certain jobs and thus included EJD as an
antecedent to surface and deep acting (Brotheridge & Lee 2000; Grandey 1999).
Proposition 3: Frequency, variety, and intensity of emotion will be positively related to surface acting.
Proposition 4: Frequency, variety, and intensity of emotion will be positively related to deep acting.
Positive and negative affect
Affect refers to an individual’s overall or general outlook on life (Watson, Clark & Tellegen
1988). Individuals with high positive affect tend to view situations and circumstances in a positive
way and are considered optimistic. Alternatively, those individuals with high negative affect tend to
be pessimistic and focus on the negative aspects of situations and circumstances. There are few
studies that have included positive and negative affect as antecedents to surface and deep acting.
Grandey (2000) included positive and negative affect in her theoretical model of the emotion
regulation process. This was based on Morris and Feldman’s (1996) proposal that less ED will be
observed when the individual’s expected emotional display is aligned with their predisposed
affectivity. For example, an employee who has high positive affect, and is required to display positive
emotions as part of their job, may experience less ED and require less emotional effort to display the
‘appropriate’ emotion than an individual high in negative affect. The relationship between negative

6
affect and burnout was then tested by Brotheridge and Grandey (2002) who found that negative affect
was a significant control variable in predicting all three dimensions of burnout.
Proposition 5: Positive affect will be negatively related to EL (surface and deep acting) when the
required expression of emotion is positive.
Proposition 6: Negative affect will be positively related to EL (surface and deep acting) when the
required expression of emotion is positive.

Mediators and Outcomes

Emotional dissonance
Emotional dissonance is ‘the degree to which employees’ expressed emotions align with their
true feelings’ (Kruml & Geddes 2000: 19).The present model incorporates the sequence of EL
predicting emotional exhaustion (EE) through its relationship with emotional dissonance (ED) or the
‘ELEDEE’ sequence which has previously been discussed in the literature (for a review see Hartel,
Hsu & Boyle 2002). Although various conceptualisations of the relationship between ED and EL have
been posited, evidence from recent research suggests that ED mediates the relationship between EL
and emotional exhaustion (Brotheridge & Grandey 2002; Erickson & Ritter 2001; Hartel, Hsu &
Boyle, 2001; Hartel et al. 2002; Van Dijk & Brown 2006). When employees engage in surface acting
they experience a conflict between their felt and expressed emotions or ED and this incongruence has
negative consequences for the person involved. In contrast, employees who are able to express their
genuine emotions will experience little or no ED, and hence are less likely to suffer from burnout.
Proposition 7: Surface acting will positively predict burnout through its relationship with ED.
Proposition 8: Deep acting will positively predict burnout through its relationship with ED.
Proposition 9: Genuine expression will negatively predict burnout.
Emotional and cognitive effort
Drawing on Gross’ (1998) emotion regulation theory Grandey (2000) suggested that
employees may use attentional deployment and cognitive change techniques when deep acting. Both
types of emotion regulation are considered to be ‘deep’ in that the internal processes, including the
person’s thoughts and feelings, are modified in order to make their expression more genuine. In
contrast, when surface acting employees engage in response modulation whereby they work to
outwardly display the desired emotion without altering their actual feelings, the so-called ‘mask’ of
EL. In this paper, we propose that attentional deployment, cognitive change and response modulation
techniques require emotional and cognitive effort to enact. Emotional effort refers to ‘energy
expended from processing feelings and their inherent impulses to act regarding all facets of the work
demands’ (Shoaf, Genaidy & Karwowski 2001: 2635), and cognitive effort refers to ‘the energy
expended through mental processing resulting from mental job demands’ (Shoaf, Genaidy &
Karwowski 2001: 2635). The emotional effort involved in suppressing or expressing particular
emotions, and the cognitive effort inherent in changing one’s thoughts and re-appraising the situation

7
may provide the missing link between the EL strategies and burnout, and a potential explanation for
why surface acting has been found to be related to burnout whilst deep acting has not.
Proposition 10: Emotional effort and cognitive effort will positively predict burnout.
Burnout
The outcome variable that has received the most attention in the EL literature is burnout, and
in particular the dimension of emotional exhaustion. Burnout refers to feelings of emotional drain or
fatigue and has been defined as the consequence of ‘people work’ where individuals experience
emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation and reduced personal accomplishment (Maslach 1982).
Emotional exhaustion is when there is a depletion of emotional energy whereas depersonalisation is
where an individual may distance themselves from a situation in order to cope with the emotional
drain. Emotional exhaustion and depersonalisation are considered central to burnout whereas personal
accomplishment is considered more of a personality variable related to the sense of achievement
experienced through engaging in work (similar to self-efficacy) (Maslach & Jackson 1981). These
three aspects of burnout have been found to be interrelated. A demanding job may result in increased
emotional exhaustion, reduced personal accomplishment and individuals may cope with this situation
through depersonalisation or distancing themselves from their job (Leiter & Maslach 1988). When
conceptualised as an internal regulation strategy, EL seems to be related to burnout however, in
contrast to Hochschild’s (1983) proposition, surface actors rather than deep actors responded with
higher emotional exhaustion (Brotheridge & Grandey 2002; Brotheridge & Lee 2002; Grandey 2000;
Totterdell & Holman 2003; Zammuner & Galli 2005). In particular, a study by Brotheridge (1999)
attempted to further understand the relationship between EL and emotional exhaustion. It was found
that authenticity fully mediated this relationship. Brotheridge argued that it is not the sheer volume of
work, nor whether an employee engages in surface or deep acting, it is the personal authenticity that
an employee feels towards the situation and their reaction. The less authentic an employee feels, the
greater their emotional exhaustion. For this reason genuine expression is included as an additional
strategy for managing EL in the proposed model.
Proposition 11: Surface acting will be positively related to emotional exhaustion through its
relationship with the internal process variables.
Proposition 12: Surface acting will be positively related to depersonalisation through its relationship
with the internal process variables.
Proposition 13: Deep acting will be positively related to personal accomplishment through its
relationship with the internal process variables.
Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction refers to the attitude an employee may have towards certain aspects of their
job and work experiences. An employee may assess their job satisfaction based on whether their
needs and expectations are met. This may relate to satisfaction with extrinsic rewards (external to the
job) or intrinsic rewards (relate to specific aspects of the job) (Warr, Cook & Wall 1979). Although

8
Grandey (2003) included job satisfaction as an antecedent of EL and found that it negatively predicted
both surface and deep acting, most studies consider job satisfaction to be an outcome of EL. However,
these studies have somewhat mixed findings. Specifically, Morris and Feldman (1996b; 1997) found
that ED, but not emotional job demands, was negatively associated with job satisfaction. Similarly,
Abraham (1998; 1999a; 1999b) found support for a negative relationship between ED and job
satisfaction. Specifically, in her three studies Abraham found that ED was negatively related to job
satisfaction and this relationship was moderated by social support in high-support groups, negative
affect and self-monitoring. In contract, Adelmann (1995) found that the significant, negative
relationship between ED and job satisfaction was negated after controlling for job complexity, job
control and income. In the present model, job satisfaction is considered an outcome of emotional job
demands and EL strategies in line with most studies in this area. It is proposed that an employee who
genuinely expresses their emotions is more likely to feel positive towards their work and have higher
job satisfaction. Employees who engage in surface and/or deep acting may, as a result, experience less
job satisfaction due to the experienced ED and emotional effort required to ‘act’ the appropriate
emotion. Similarly, employees who genuinely express their emotions are more likely to be satisfied.
Proposition 14: Surface acting will be negatively related to job satisfaction through its relationship
with the internal process variables.
Proposition 15: Deep acting will be negatively related to job satisfaction through its relationship with
the internal process variables.
Proposition 16: Genuine expression will be positively related to job satisfaction.
Organisational commitment
The attachment an employee feels towards their organisation is referred to as organisational
commitment. Of particular interest are the different types of commitment and how surface and deep
acting differentially impact on them. Organisational commitment may be measured along three
dimensions: affective, continuance and normative (Allen & Meyer 1990). Affective commitment
relates to the emotional attachment an employee feels towards the organisation. Continuance
commitment refers to the attachment to the organisation as a result of limited options to exit and
therefore the employee remains more out of necessity rather than an emotional bond. Normative
commitment occurs when an employee feels a certain obligation to remain with the organisation.
Normative commitment was not included in the proposed model as many studies have found that it
does not easily separate out from the other dimensions of organisational commitment (for a review see
Bergman 2006). Two studies have included commitment as an outcome of EL (Abraham 1999a;
Adelmann 1995). Adelmann conceptualised EL as emotional expression and found that job
commitment was significantly related to EL, however after controlling for job complexity, job control
and income these results were no longer significant. This finding suggests that it is the characteristics
of the job that may result in organisational commitment, not EL directly. Abraham (1999a), who
conceptualised EL as ED, found that ED negatively predicted job satisfaction and organisational

9
commitment. It is proposed in this paper that the two dimensions of organisational commitment will
be differentially impacted by the EL strategy, through its relationship with the internal process
variables particularly ED. Individuals who are more likely to deep act will have high levels of
affective commitment as this strategy is more highly rewarded by customers during employee-
customer interaction and is more closely aligned with genuine expression. Similarly, employees who
surface act will have higher levels of continuance commitment.
Proposition 17: Deep acting will be positively related to affective commitment.
Proposition 18: Surface acting will be positively related to continuance commitment.

DISCUSSION
This conceptual paper has sought to integrate the different views of EL by proposing that they
are complementary rather than opposing viewpoints. A model was developed which incorporated all
four facets of EL together with antecedent and outcome variables. Antecedents included the
characteristics of the job itself and its emotional demands. In addition, positive and negative affect
were included to understand its influence on individual preference for surface and deep acting.
Outcome variables included those commonly tested in previous research such as emotional
exhaustion, personal accomplishment, and depersonalisation. However, the model also extended this
research by incorporating variables such as organisational commitment (affective and continuance),
and job satisfaction (extrinsic and intrinsic) to understand the differential impact of EL on these
attitudes. This paper also contributes to the EL literature in that it differentiates EL (which occurs
between employee and client) from emotion work (which occurs between employee and employee),
and posits that each may have positive and negative consequences for the individual. Further research
is needed to test this model in a variety of contexts and occupations.

10
REFERENCES

Abraham R (1998) Emotional dissonance in organizations: Antecedents, consequences, and

moderators, Genetics, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 124(2): 229-246.
Abraham R (1999a) The impact of emotional dissonance on organizational commitment and
intention to turnover, The Journal of Psychology, 133(4): 441-445.
Abraham R (1999b) Negative affectivity: Moderator or confound in emotional dissonance-
outcome relationships?, The Journal of Psychology, 133: 61-72.
Abraham R (2000) The role of job control as a moderator of emotional dissonance and
emotional intelligence-outcome relationships, The Journal of Psychology, 134(2):
169-184.
Adelmann P (1995) Emotional labor as a potential source of job stress, in Organizational
Risk Factors For Job Stress, eds SL Sauter & LR Murphy, American Psychological
Association, Washington, DC, 371-381.
Allen NJ & Meyer JP (1990) The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and
normative commitment to the organization, Journal of Occupational Psychology,
63(1): 1-18.
Ashforth BE & Humphrey RH (1993) Emotional labor in service roles: The influence of
identity, Academy of Management Review, 18(1): 88-115.
Ashkanasy NM, Hartel CEJ & Zerbe WJ (eds) (2000) Emotions in the Workplace: Research,
Theory and Practice, Quorum Books, London.
Ashkanasy NM, Zerbe WJ & Hartel CEJ (eds) (2002) Managing Emotions in the Workplace,
M.E.Sharpe, Armonk, NY.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2005) Yearbook Australia, Canberra.
Bailey JJ & McCollough MA (2000) Emotional labor and the difficult customer: Coping
strategies of service agents and organizational consequences, Journal of Professional
Marketing Services, 20(2): 51-72.
Beal DJ, Trougakos JP, Weiss HM & Green SG (2006) Episodic processes of emotional
labor: Perceptions of affective delivery and regulation strategies, Journal of Applied
Psychology, 91(5): 1053-1065.
Bergman ME (2006) The relationship between affective commitment and normative
commitment: Review and research agenda, Journal of Organizational Behavior,
27(5): 645-663.
Brotheridge CM (1999) Unwrapping the black box: A test of why emotional labour may lead
to emotional exhaustion, in Administrative Sciences Association of Canada
Conference, ASAC, New Brunswick, Canada, 11-20.
Brotheridge CM & Grandey AA (2002) Emotional labor and burnout: Comparing two
perspectives of "people work", Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60: 17-39.
Brotheridge CM & Lee RT (1998) On the Dimensionality of Emotional Labour:
Development and validation of an emotional labour scale, in First Conference on
Emotions in Organizational Life, San Diego.
Brotheridge CM & Lee RT (2000) Development and Validation of the Emotional Labour
Scale, University of Manitoba.
Brotheridge CM & Lee RT (2002) Testing a conservation of resources model of the dynamics
of emotional labor, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7(1): 57-67.
Brotheridge CM & Lee RT (2003) Development and Validation of the Emotional Labour
Scale, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76: 365-379.
Callaghan JL & McCollum EE (2002) Obscured variability: The distinction between emotion
work and emotional labor, in Managing Emotions in the Workplace, eds NM
Ashkanasy, WJ Zerbe & CEJ Hartel, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, 219-231.

11
Cropanzano R, Rupp DE & Byrne ZS (2003) The relationship of emotional exhaustion to
work attitudes, job performance, and organizational citizenship behaviors, Journal of
Applied Psychology, 88(1): 160-169.
Erickson RJ & Ritter C (2001) Emotional labor, burnout, and inauthenticity: Does gender
matter?, Social Psychology Quarterly, 64(2): 146-163.
Fineman S (1993) Emotion in Organizations, Sage, London.
Glomb TM & Tews MJ (2004) Emotional labour: A conceptualization and scale
development, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64: 1-23.
Grandey AA (2000) Emotion regulation in the workplace: A new way to conceptualise
emotional labor, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(1): 95-110.
Grandey AA (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(1): 86-96.
Gross JJ (1998) The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review, Review of
General Psychology, 2: 271-299.
Hackman JR & Oldham GR (1975) Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey, Journal of
Applied Psychology, 60(2): 159-170.
Hackman JR & Oldham GR (1980) Work Redesign, Addison-Wesley, Massachusetts.
Hartel C, Hsu A & Boyle M (2002) A conceptual examination of the causal consequences of
emotional labor, emotional dissonance, and emotional exhaustion: The argument for
the role contextual and provider characteristics, in Managing Emotions in the
Workplace, eds NM Ashkanasy, WJ Zerbe & CEJ Hartel, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY,
251-275.
Hochschild AR (1979) Emotion Work, Feeling Rules, and Social Structure, American
Journal of Sociology, 85(3): 551-575.
Hochschild AR (1983) The Managed Heart, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Humphrey RH (2000) The importance of job characteristics to emotional displays, in
Emotions in the Workplace: Research, theory, and practice, eds NM Ashkanasy, CEJ
Hartel & WJ Zerbe, Quorum Books, Westport, CT.
Kruml SM & Geddes D (2000) Exploring the dimensions of emotional labor, Management
Communication Quarterly, 14(1): 8-49.
Leiter M & Maslach C (1988) The impact of interpersonal environment on burnout and
organizational commitment, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9: 297-308.
Lord RG, Klimoski RJ & Kanfer R (eds) (2002) Emotions in the Workplace: understanding
the structure and role of emotions in organizational behavior, Jossey-Bass, San
Francisco, CA.
Mann S (1999) Emotion at work: To what extent are we expressing, suppressing, or faking?,
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology(8): 3.
Maslach C (1982) Burnout: The cost of caring, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Maslach C & Jackson SE (1981) The measurement of experienced burnout, Journal of
Occupational Behaviour, 2: 99-113.
Morris JA & Feldman DC (1996) The dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of
emotional labor, Academy of Management Review, 21(4): 986-1010.
Morris JA & Feldman DC (1997) Managing emotions in the workplace, Journal of
Managerial Issues, IX(3): 257-274.
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 RI (1989) The expression of emotion in organizational life, Research in
Organizational Behavior, 11: 1-42.

12
Rubin RS, Tardino VMS, Daus CS & Munz DC (2005) A reconceptualization of the
emotional labor construct: On the development of an integrated theory of perceived
emotional dissonance and emotional labor, in Emotions in Organizational Behavior,
eds CEJ Hartel, WJ Zerbe & NM Ashkanasy, Lawrence Erlbaum, New Jersey.
Shoaf CL, Genaidy A & Karwowski W (2001) A framework for assessment of work-related
musculoskeletal hazards, in International Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human
Factors, ed W Karwowski, Taylor & Francis, NY, 2631-2639.
Smith P (1992) The Emotional Labor of Nursing, Macmillan, London.
Totterdell P & Holman D (2003) Emotion regulation in customer service roles: Testing a
model of emotional labor, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8(1): 55-73.
Van Dijk P & Brown A (2006) Emotional labour and negative job outcomes: An evaluation
of the mediating role of emotional dissonance, Journal of Management &
Organization, 12: 101-115.
Warr P, Cook J & Wall TD (1979) Scales for the measurement of some work attitudes and
aspects of psychological well-being, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 52: 129-
148.
Watson D, Clark LA & Tellegen A (1988) Development and validation of brief measures of
positive and negative affect: The PANAS scale, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 54(6): 1063-1070.
Wharton AS (1993) The affective consequences of service work: Managing emotions on the
job, Work and Occupations, 20(2): 205-232.
Zammuner VL & Galli C (2005) The relationship with patients: "Emotional labour" and its
correlates in hospital employees, in Emotions in Organizational Behavior, eds CEJ
Hartel, WJ Zerbe & NM Ashkanasy, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
Zapf D (2002) Emotion work and psychological well-being: A review of the literature and
some conceptual considerations, Human Resource Management Review, 12: 237-268.
Zapf D, Vogt C, Seifert C, Mertini H & Isic A (1999) Emotion work as a source of stress:
The concept and development of an instrument, European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 8(3): 371-400.

13