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