Skip to main content

Table 5 Mediator analysis. Standardized direct, indirect and total effects

From: Precursors and outcomes of work engagement among nursing professionals—a cross-sectional study

Hypothesis

Effecta

Mediator

Direct effecta

Indirect effect

Total effect

Mediator effectb

H2b

WE → TI

JS

0.085

−0.501***

0.416

Full

H5b

IMOC → WE

CC

0.275**

0.207**

0.482

Partial

H6a

IMOC → SQC

WE

−0.155

0.141**

0.014

Full

H6b

IMOC → TI

WE

−0.179

0.023

−0.156

No

H6c

IMOC → JS

WE

0.111

0.178**

0.289

Full

H7a

CC → SQC

WE

0.211

0.145**

0.356

Full

H7b

CC → TI

WE

0.069

0.024

0.093

No

H7c

CC → JS

WE

0.223***

0.183**

0.406

Partial

  1. Notes: IMOC Internal market-oriented culture, CC Collaboration climate, WE Work engagement, SQC Service quality of care, TI Turnover intention, JS Job satisfaction
  2. ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01 are significance levels
  3. a The direct effects (the links X → Y) in our basic structural model (Fig. 2) are almost identical in our model for mediation analysis
  4. b We used the bootstrapping test of Zhao et al. [48] to test mediation. Briefly, this approach tests, through bootstrapping, whether the direct and indirect effects are statistically significant, and the combination of these two tests decides if there exists no, partial or full mediation